
Class ___lA^Ai_ 

Book _ll_Jv_ 

Ccpiglit 14?__ 



COPXRIGHT DEPOSm 



THE 
GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



COSTS 

SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 

By 
FRANK P. BACHMAN 

AND 

RALPH BOWMAN 



GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 

61 Broadway New York 

1918 



OS- 
7o» 



COSTS 



SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

The results of the study of the Gary Public 
Schools, undertaken on the invitation of the Super- 
intendent and the Board of Education of Gary, will 
be published in eight parts, as follows: 

The Gary Schools: A General Account 

By Abraham Flexner and Frank P. Bachman 

(25 Cents) 

Organization and Administration 
George D. Strayer and Frank P. Bachman 

(IS Cents) 

Costs 
Frank P. Bachman and Ralph Bowman 

(25 Cents) 

Industrial Work 
Charles R. Richards 

(25 Cents) 

Household Arts 
Eva W. White 

(10 Cents) 

Physical Training and Play 

Lee F. Hanmer 

(10 Cents) 

Science Teaching 

Otis W. Caldwell 

(10 Cents) 

Measurement of Classroom Products 

Stuart A. Courtis 

(30 Cents) 

Any report will be sent postpaid on receipt of the 
amount above specified. 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



COSTS 

SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 



BY 
FRANK P. $ACHMAN 

AND 

RALPH BOWMAN 



GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 

61 Broadway New York 

1918 






COPYRIGHT, I918, 
BY 

General Education Board 



1 CI. A 5 U 853 

DEC 12 1918 



\ 



CONTENTS 



PA(JE 



Introduction vii 

I. Accounting Methods 3 

II. Current Cost of Entire System . . 7 

III. Current Cost of Regular Day Schools 9 

IV. Current Cost of Larger Day Schools . 44 

V. Current Cost of the School Shops . . 50 

VI. Capital Outlay for Grounds, Buildings, 

and Equipment 64 

VII. Fixed Charges 69 

VIII. Financing the System 72 

IX. Appendix 85 



INTRODUCTION 

The Gary Plan 

In the last few years both laymen and professional 
educators have engaged in a lively controversy as to the 
merits and defects, advantages and disadvantages of 
what has come to be called the Gary idea or the Gary 
plan. The rapidly increasing literature bearing on the 
subject is, however, deficient in details and too often 
partisan in tone. The present study was undertaken 
by the General Education Board at the request of the 
Gary school authorities for the purpose of presenting an 
accurate and comprehensive account of the Gary schools 
in their significant aspects. 

In the several volumes in which the main features of 
the Gary schools are separately considered, the reader 
will observe that, after presenting facts, each of the 
authors discusses or — in technical phrase — attempts to 
evaluate the Gary plan from the angle of his particular 
interest. Facts were gathered in a patient, painstaking, 
and objective fashion; and those who want facts, and 
facts only, will, it is believed, find them in the descriptive 
and statistical portions of the respective studies. But 
the successive volumes will discuss principles, as well as 



viii INTRODUCTION 

state facts. That is, the authors will not only describe 
the Gary schools in the frankest manner, as they found 
them, but they will also endeavor to interpret them in the 
light of the large educational movement of which they 
are part. An educational conception may be sound or 
unsound; any particular effort to embody an educa- 
tional conception may be adequate or inadequate, effec- 
tive or ineffective. The public is interested in knowing 
whether the Gary schools as now conducted are efficient 
or inefficient; the public is also interested in knowing 
whether the plan as such is sound or unsound. The 
present study tries to do justice to both points. 

What is the Gary plan? 

Perhaps, in the first instance, the essential features of 
the Gary plan can be made clear, if, instead of trying to 
tell what the Gary plan is, we tell what it is not. Ex- 
cept for its recent origin and the unusual situation as 
respects its foreign population, Gary resembles many 
other industrial centers that are to be found throughout 
the country. Now, had Gary provided itself with the 
type of school commonly found in other small industrial 
American towns, we should find there half a dozen or 
more square brick "soap-box" buildings, each accom- 
modating a dozen classes pursuing the usual book studies, 
a playground, with little or no equipment, perhaps a 
basement room for manual training, a laboratory, and a 
cooking room for the girls. Had Gary played safe, this 
is the sort of school and school equipment that it would 
now possess. Provided with this conventional school 




& 



pq 



Pi 



INTRODUCTION ix 

system, the town would have led a conventional school 
life — quiet, unoffending, and negatively happy — doing 
as many others do, doing it about as well as they do it 
and satisfied to do just that. 

As contrasted with education of this meager type, the 
Gary plan is distinguished by two features, intimately 
connected with each other: 

First — the enrichment and diversification of the 
curriculum; 

Second — the administrative device that, for want of a 
better name, will be tentatively termed the duplicate 
school organization. 
These two features must first be considered in general 
terms, if the reader is to understand the detailed descrip- 
tion and discussion. 

As to the curriculum and school activities. While 
the practice of education has in large part continued 
to follow traditional paths, the progressive literature of 
the subject has abounded in constructive suggestions 
of far-reaching practical significance. Social, political, 
and industrial changes have forced upon the school 
responsibilities formerly laid upon the home. Once the 
school had mainly to teach the elements of knowledge; 
now the school is charged with the physical, mental, and 
social training of the child. To meet these needs a 
changed and enriched curriculum, including community 
activities, facilities for recreation, shop work, and house- 
hold arts, has been urged on the content side of school 
work; the transformation of school aims and discipline 



x INTRODUCTION 

on the basis of modern psychology, ethics, and social 
philosophy has been for similar reasons recommended on 
the side of attitude and method. 

These things have been in the air. Every one of them 
has been tried and is being practised in some form or 
other, somewhere or other. In probably every large 
city in the country efforts have been made, especially in 
the more recent school plants, to develop some of the 
features above mentioned. There has been a distinct, 
unmistakable, and general trend toward making the 
school a place where children "live" as well as "learn." 
This movement did not originate at Gary; nor is Gary its 
only evidence. It is none the less true that perhaps no- 
where else have the schools so deliberately and explicitly 
avowed this modern policy. The Gary schools are offi- 
cially described as "work, study, and play" schools — 
schools, that is, that try to respond adequately to a many- 
sided responsibility; how far and with what success, the 
successive reports of the Gary survey will show. 

It must not, however, be supposed that the enriched 
curriculum was applied in its present form at the out- 
set or that it is equally well developed in all the Gary 
schools. Far from it. There has been a distinct and 
uneven process of development at Gary; sometimes, as 
subsequent chapters will show, such rapid and unstable 
development that our account may in certain respects 
be obsolete before it is printed. When the Emerson 
school was opened in 1909, the equipment in laboratories, 
shops, and museums, while doubtless superior to what 







tf 



INTRODUCTION xi 

was offered by other towns of the Gary type, could have 
been matched by what was to be found in many of the 
better favored larger towns and cities at the same period. 
The gymnasium, for example, was not more than one 
third its present size; the industrial work was not un- 
precedented in kind or extent; the boys had woodwork, 
the girls cooking and sewing. But progress was rapid: 
painting and printing were added in 191 1; the foundry, 
forge, and machine shop in 1913. The opportunities 
for girls were enlarged by the addition of the cafeteria in 
1 9 13. The auditorium reached its present extended use 
as recently as the school year 1913-14. The Froebel 
school, first occupied in the fall of 191 2, started with 
facilities similar to those previously introduced piecemeal 
into the Emerson. 

These facilities, covering in their development a period 
of years, represent the effort to create an elementary 
school more nearly adequate to the needs of modern 
urban life. The curriculum is enriched by various ac- 
tivities in the fields of industry, science, and recreation. 
Questions as to the efficiency with which these varied 
activities have been administered will be discussed by 
the various contributors to the present study. Mean- 
while, it is perhaps only fair to point out that the modern 
movement calls not only for additions to, but elimina- 
tions from, the curriculum and for a critical attitude 
toward the products of classroom teaching. How far, on 
the academic side, the Gary schools reflect this aspect 
of the modern movement will also presently appear. 



xii INTRODUCTION 

The administrative device — the "duplicate" organiza- 
tion, noted above as the second characteristic feature of 
the Gary plan — stands on a somewhat different footing, 
as the following considerations make plain. 

Once more, Mr. Wirt was not the inventor of the in- 
tensive use of school buildings, though he was among the 
first — if not the very first — to perceive the purely educa- 
tional advantage to which the situation could be turned. 
The rapidity with which American cities have grown has 
created a difficult problem for school administrators — 
the problem of providing space and instruction for chil- 
dren who increase in number faster than buildings are 
constructed. The problem has been handled in various 
ways. In one place, the regular school day has been 
shortened and two different sets of children attending at 
different hours have been taught daily in one building 
and by one group of teachers. Elsewhere, as in certain 
high schools, a complete double session has been con- 
ducted. The use of one set of schoolrooms for more than 
one set of children each day did not therefore originate 
at Gary. 

Another point needs to be considered before we discuss 
the so-called duplicate feature of the Gary plan. In 
American colleges, subjects have commonly been taught 
by specialists, not by class teachers. The work is "de- 
partmentalized" — to use the technical term. There is 
a teacher of Latin, a teacher of mathematics, a teacher 
of physics, who together instruct every class — not a 
separate teacher of each class in all subjects. Latterly, 



INTRODUCTION xiii 

departmentalization has spread from the college into 
the high school, until nowadays well organized high 
schools and the upper grades of elementary schools are 
quite generally "departmentalized," i.e., organized with 
special teachers for the several subjects, rather than 
with one teacher for each grade. 

Out of these two elements, Gary has evolved an admin- 
istrative device, the so-called duplicate school, which, 
from the standpoint of its present educational signifi- 
cance, does indeed represent a definite innovation. 

For the sake of clearness, it will be well to explain the 
theory of the duplicate school by a simplified imaginary 
example : 

Let us suppose that elementary school facilities have 
to be provided for, say, 1,600 children. If each class is 
to contain a maximum of 40 children, a schoolhouse of 
40 rooms would formerly have been built, with perhaps 
a few additional rooms, little used, for special activities; 
except during the recess (12 to 1:30) each recitation 
room would be in practically continuous use in the old- 
line subjects from 9 to 3 30, when school is adjourned till 
next morning. A school plant of this kind may be 
represented by Figure I, each square representing a 
schoolroom. 

The "duplicate" school proposes a different solution. 
Instead of providing 40 classrooms for 40 classes, it 
requires 20 classrooms, capable of holding 800 children; 
and further, playgrounds, laboratories, shops, gardens, 
gymnasium, and auditorium, also capable of holding 



XIV 



INTRODUCTION 



800 children. If, now, 800 children use the classrooms 
while 800 are using the other facilities, morning and after- 
noon, the entire plant accommodates 1,600 pupils 
throughout the school day; and the curriculum is greatly- 
enriched, since, without taking away anything from their 
classroom work, they are getting other branches also. A 
school thus equipped and organized may be represented 

FIGURE I 
REPRESENTS OLD-FASHIONED SCHOOLHOUSE 



40 rooms for 40 classes, of 40 children each, i. e., facilities for the academic instruc- 
tion of 1,600 children. A school yard and an extra room or two, little used, for special 
activities, are also usually found. 



















































































by Figure II, in which A represents 20 classes taking 
care of 40 children each (800 children) , and B represents 
special facilities taking care of 800 children. As A 
and B are in simultaneous operation, 1,600 children are 
cared for. 

This method of visualizing the "duplicate" school 
serves to correct a common misconception. The plan 
aims to intensify the use of schoolrooms; yet it would be 



INTRODUCTION 



xv 



incorrect to say that 20 classrooms, instead of 40, 
as under the old plan, accommodate 1,600 children. 
For while the number of classrooms has been reduced 
from 40 to 20, special facilities of equal capacity have 
been added in the form of auditorium, shops, play- 
ground, etc. The 20 classrooms apparently saved 

FIGURE 11 
REPRESENTS THE GARY EQUIPMENT 
A B 

20 classrooms for academic instruction Special facilities, taking care of 800 chil- 

of 20 classes of 40 children each (800 chil- dren in the morning hours and an equal 
dren) -in the morning hours and an equal number in the afternoon hours (1,600 in all 
number in the afternoon (1 ,600 in all daily) daily) 













Auditorium 












Shops 












Laboratories 












Playground, gardens, 
; gymnasium and library 



have been replaced by special facilities of one kind or 
another. The so-called duplicate organization and 
the longer school day make it possible to give larger 
facilities to twice as many children as the classrooms alone 
would accommodate. The duplicate school, as devel- 
oped at Gary, is not therefore a device to relieve conges- 
tion or to reduce expense, but the natural result of 
efforts to provide a richer school life for all children. 



xvi INTRODUCTION 

The enriched curriculum and the duplicate organ- 
ization support each other. The social situation re- 
quires a scheme of education fairly adequate to the 
entire scope of the child's activities and possibilities; 
this cannot be achieved without a longer school day and 
a more varied school equipment. The duplicate school 
endeavors to give the longer day, the richer curriculum, 
and the more varied activities with the lowest possible 
investment in, and the most intensive use of, the school 
plant. The so-called duplicate school is thus a single 
school with two different types of facilities in more or less 
constant and simultaneous operation, morning and 
afternoon. 

Such is the Gary plan in conception. What about the 
execution? Is it realized at Gary? Does it work? 
What is involved as respects space, investment, etc., 
when ordinary classrooms are replaced by shops, play- 
grounds, and laboratories? Can a given equipment in 
the way of auditorium, shops, etc., handle precisely 
the same number of children accommodated in the class- 
rooms without doing violence to their educational needs 
on the one hand, and without waste through temporary 
disuse of the special facilities, on the other? To what 
extent has Gary modified or reorganized on modern lines 
the treatment of the common classroom subjects? How 
efficient is instruction in the usual academic studies as 
well as in the newer or so-called modern subjects and 
activities? Is the plan economical in the sense that 
equal educational advantages cannot be procured by 




pq 



INTRODUCTION xvii 

any other scheme except at greater cost? These and 
other questions as to the execution of the Gary plan are, 
as far as data were obtainable, discussed in the separate 
volumes making up the present survey. 

The concrete questions above mentioned do not, how- 
ever, exhaust the educational values of a given school 
situation. From every school system there come im- 
ponderable products, bad as well as good. Aside from 
all else, many observers of the Gary schools report one 
such imponderable in the form of a spiritual something 
which can hardly be included in a study of administra- 
tion and eludes the testing of classroom work. These 
observers have no way of knowing whether Gary school 
costs are high or low; whether the pupils spell and add as 
well as children do elsewhere; but, however these things 
may be, they usually describe the pupils as characterized 
by self-possession, resourcefulness, and happiness to an 
unusual degree. While different schools and indeed 
different parts of the same school vary in this respect, 
the members of the survey staff agree that, on the whole, 
there is a basis of fact for these observations. Gary is 
thus something more than a school organization charac- 
terized by the two main features above discussed. 

The reason is not far to seek. Innovation is stimu- 
lating, just as conformity is deadening. Experiment 
is in this sense a thing wholesome in itself. Of course 
it must be held to strict accountability for results; and 
this study is the work of persons who, convinced of the 
necessity of educational progress, are at the same time 



xviii INTRODUCTION 

solicitous that the outcome be carefully observed. 
The fact that customary school procedure does not rest 
upon a scientific basis, does not willingly submit itself 
to thorough scrutiny, is no reason for exempting educa- 
tional innovations from strict accountability. The very 
reverse is indeed true; for otherwise innovation may im- 
peril or sacrifice essential educational values, without 
actually knowing whether or not it has achieved definite 
values of its own. Faith in a new program does not 
absolve the reformer from a watchful and critical atti- 
tude toward results. Moreover, if the innovator for- 
mulates his purposes in definite terms and measures his 
results in the light of his professed aims, the conservative 
cannot permanently escape the same process. Gary, like 
all other educational experiments, must be held account- 
able in this fashion. Subject however to such ac- 
countability, the breaking of the conventional school 
framework, the introduction of new subject matter or 
equipment, even administrative reorganization, at Gary as 
elsewhere, tend to favor a fresher, more vigorous interest 
and spirit. Defects will in the following pages be pointed 
out in the Gary schools — defects of organization, of ad- 
ministration, of instruction. But there is for the reasons 
just suggested something in the Gary schools over and 
above the Gary plan. Problems abound, as in every 
living and developing situation. But the problems 
are the problems of life, and, as such, are in the long 
run perhaps more hopeful than the relatively smooth 
functioning of a stationary school system. Thus, not- 



INTRODUCTION xix 

withstanding the defects and shortcomings which this 
study will candidly point out, the experiment at Gary 
rightly observed and interpreted is both interesting and 
stimulating. 



COSTS 



SCHOOL YEAR 1916-1916 



COSTS 

I. ACCOUNTING METHODS 

THE basic financial record of the Gary schools 
consists of a single-entry cash book of receipts 
and disbursements, prescribed by the State 
Bureau of Public Accounts, and the original documents 
supporting the several entries. 

In recording receipts and expenditures, the cash rec- 
ord makes no fund divisions other than the Common 
School Tuition Fund, available only for teachers' salaries; 
Special School Fund, available for any school purposes 
whatsoever; Bond Principal and Interest Fund, avail- 
able only to redeem bonds and pay interest thereon; and 
Loan Funds, the proceeds of bonds. 

Distribution of expenditures to show the character 
of the expense — that is, whether for operation, upkeep, 
fixed charges, or capital outlay — is made on records 
supplementary to the cash book, and these are worked 
out mostly by students, as a laboratory exercise in the 
commercial department, from invoices, payrolls, requisi- 
tions, work orders, and the like. 

Finally, the cash record takes cognizance of revenues 
only when they are received, and of expenditures only 

3 



4 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

when paid, with the result that revenues credited against 
one school year may belong to the preceding or suc- 
ceeding year, and an expenditure paid in 1915-1916 
may represent an obligation incurred in 1914-1915; 
thus, to some extent, accounts of different school years 
overlap. 

The methods employed do not adequately meet the 
requirements of a school system such as that of Gary, 
organized into day, Saturday, night, summer, and Sun- 
day schools, and conducting numerous instructional 
and industrial activities. For example, from the rec- 
ords as they stood July 31, 191 6, it was impossible to 
draw either a balance sheet or a specific revenue and 
expenditure statement for the school year 1915-1916. 
Furthermore, an examination of the cost reports de- 
veloped the fact that these are not reports of total 
direct expenditures, but tabulations of expenses after 
the direct expenditure has been apportioned among a 
number of organizations or activities on a theoretical 
or empirical basis. 

Therefore, to determine the expenditures of the schools 
for the fiscal year August 1, 191 5, to July 31, 191 6, it 
was necessary to canvass all expenditures for the period 
in order to eliminate such items as belonged to other 
years and to add such invoices and payrolls as remained 
unpaid at the year's end. 

It was also necessary to analyze anew all cost reports. 
In the course of this analysis, original documents were 
often encountered which did not contain the required 



ACCOUNTING METHODS 5 

information. Store records were not infrequently lack- 
ing. Inventories showing materials on hand at the 
beginning and end of the year were either not at hand or 
were inaccurate and incomplete. Expenditures were 
not carefully divided as between plants, organizations, 
and services, and often the character of the expenditures 
was not clearly defined. 

The analysis in question required, as the first step, 
the preparation of an adequate expenditure code. The 
code prepared takes into consideration: 

(1) Divisions by school plants. 

(2) Character of expenditure. 

(3) Services. 

Services were subdivided into 

(a) Services relating to administration, the expendi- 
ture for which can not advantageously be distributed to 
any other service division. 

(b) Other general services, such as compulsory at- 
tendance and medical inspection. 

(c) Services relating specifically to property — Its 
acquisition, obligations of ownership, operation, and up- 
keep. 

(d) Services relating specifically to instruction. 

The expenses of the Gary schools as compiled on the 
basis of this code and our analysis of the cost, along 
with related data, are reported in the appendix in the 
following tables: 

A. Expenditures and Revenues in Summary. 

B. Balance Sheet. 



6 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

C. Operation Statement. 

D. Revenue Statement. 

E. Fund Statement. 

F. Inventory Statement. 

G. Bond Statement. 

H. Expenditures by Organization in Summary and 
in Detail. 

These tables, it will be noted, are the result of our 
own work, and are independent of what the Gary au- 
thorities may have compiled or published, although it 
should be stated that in distributing expenditures we 
did not depart from the bases of distribution employed 
at Gary. 1 

The present report is confined entirely to the descrip- 
tion and discussion of Gary expenditures. Comparison 
with other cities is not attempted. To have assembled 
data strictly comparable with Gary would have in- 
volved an equally thoroughgoing financial study of other 
cities. Nevertheless, those wishing to institute com- 
parisons between Gary and any other school system 
will find the required detail for the Gary schools in 
the tables of the appendix, and will only need to make 
a similar cost classification and distribution for the system 
to be compared. 



1 For example, the plant operation expense at the Jefferson School 
is distributed, 72 per cent, to the day school, 10 per cent, to the Satur- 
day school, and 18 per cent, to the night school, and we did not alter 
these bases of distribution. 



II. CURRENT COST OF ENTIRE SYSTEM 

PUBLIC school costs embrace capital outlays for 
grounds, buildings, and permanent equipment, 
current expenses for operation and upkeep, 
and fixed charges (that is, interest, pensions, etc.). 
Undoubtedly, a complete cost 1 report should also 
include a reasonable charge on capital invested, and 
an allowance for depreciation, inasmuch as time and 
use antiquate the best of buildings and equipment, 
but we have no means of determining what these 
charges should be at Gary. This report, therefore, 
treats each of these several items of expense, with the 
exception of allowances for depreciation and charges 
on capital invested. But we are concerned chiefly 
with the operation cost of the Gary schools, and it is 
important to make clear at the outset what this in- 
cludes. As we use the term, operation cost covers upkeep 
(that is, repairs and replacements), and current expenses 
other than upkeep, but does not include fixed charges. 

The current expenses of the entire Gary system for 
the school year 1915-1916 were $255,438.41. This 
amount was distributed as follows: 



1 Cost should be distinguished from expenditures, for a report of ex- 
penditures would also cover debt payments. 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
TABLE I 1 

Current Cost of the Entire System 



ORGANIZATION 
DIVISIONS 


EXPENSES 

OTHER 

THAN 

UPKEEP 


UPKEEP 


TOTAL 


PER CENT. 
OF TOTAL 


Administrative 
and General 
Services 2 

Day School 

Saturday School. . 

Night School 

Summer School. . . 

Sunday School . . . 


$ 21,047.72 

166,841.30 

12,427.45 

22,641.76 

13,544.64 

3,142.18 


$ 630.27 
15,163.09 


$ 21,677.99 

182,004.39 

12,427.45 

22,641.76 

13,544.64 

3,142.18 


9 
71 

5 
9 
5 

1 


Total 


$239,645.05 


$15,793.36 


$255,438.41 


100 



iThis table is based on Table H of the Appendix. 

Administrative and General Services include the Board of Education, the Super- 
intendent, Supervision of Heat and Power Plants, Attendance Enforcement, Medical 
Inspection, etc.; in short, items which it is customary to report under General Adminis- 
tration. See Schedule H-i of the Appendix. 

A review of the total current expenses of a system is 
not only interesting but yields the perspective needed 
if judgment is to be passed on the expenditure for any 
single kind of school. But at Gary, as elsewhere, the 
day schools are the heart of the system, the direct cost 
amounting to 71 per cent, of the total current expendi- 
ture for public education. For this reason, and be- 
cause of the widespread popular interest, the analyses 
and discussions of this report center chiefly on the 
operation cost of the Gary day schools. However, 
other types of schools are considered incidentally, 
and the appendix supplies detailed financial data on 
each branch of the system. 



III. CURRENT COST OF REGULAR DAY 
SCHOOLS 

Ik LTHOUGH we shall shortly question its pro- 
/-\ priety, common practice charges the entire cost 
«*- -^ of administrative and general services (which 
includes the expense of the board of education, the 
superintendent, and the like) against the day school. 
If, then, $21,677.99, the current expenditure for admin- 
istrative and general services, be added to $182,004.39, 
the direct operating cost of the day school (Table I), 
the total current day school expense becomes $203,682.38. 
This is equal to a current expense of $49.29 per pupil 
in average daily attendance (4,132), or of $36.02 per 
pupil on total enrollment (5,654). The per pupil ex- 
pense in average daily attendance may be divided as 
in Table II. 

Each item of Table II requires analysis and comment, 
but before we undertake this, it is necessary to explain 
the difference in the reported expenditures under Ad- 
ministrative and General Services as given in Table I 
($21,677.99) an d in Table II ($36,046.55). Adminis- 
trative and General Services in Table I include the over- 
head for the system as a whole. In contrast, Admin- 
istrative and General Services in Table II include the 



io THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

TABLE II 

Division of Expense Per Pupil in Average Daily 
Attendance at Regular Day Schools 



A. Administrative and General 

Services $36,046.55 



TOTAL PER PUPIL 
EXPENDITURE EXPENSE 



Administration: 

(i) The Board 1 

(2) The Superintendent 1 . . 

(3) Supervision: 

(a) Of Property 1 

(b) Of Instruction 2 

(4) Principals 2 

(5) Total 

General Services: 

(1) Provision and Storage of 
Supplies 1 . 

(2) Transportation Service 1 

(3) Compulsory Attendance 1 

(4) Medical Inspection 1 

(5) Library Service 1 

(6) Instruction in Other In- 
stitutions 1 

(7) Total 



B. Operation and Maintenance of 
Plant 



1. Operation of Buildings and 

Grounds 2 

2. Upkeep of Buildings, 
Grounds, and General Equip 

ment 2 



C. Instruction. 



1. Teachers' Salaries 2 

2. Supplies and Equipment 

Upkeep 2 



D. Grand Total $203,682.38 



4,853.79 
7,640.14 

1,821.75 

7,462.42 

6,906.14 

28,684.24 



681.12 

654.88 

730.84 

5,009.74 

18.70 

267.03 
7,362.31 



39,633.45 



26,423.27 



13,210.18 



128,002.38 



120,652.20 
7,350.18 



$ 8.72 



PER CENT. 
OF TOTAL 



1.17 
1.85 

.44 
1.81 
1.67 
6.94 



.16 

.16 

.18 

1.21 

.07 

1.78 



9.59 



6.39 



3.20 



30.98 



29.20 
1.78 



$49.29 



17.7 



2.4 
3.7 

.9 

3.7 

3.4 

14.1 



.3 

.3 

.4 

2.5 

.1 

3.6 



19.5 



13.0 



6.5 



62.8 



59.2 
3.6 



100. 



1 AU items marked " 1 " are from Schedule H-i of the Appendix. 
* AU items marked " a " are from Schedule H-a of the Appendix. 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS n 

overhead expenditures for the system as a whole, and 
also the direct overhead of the day schools (expenditures 
for day school supervision and principals), and pre- 
sents the total as the overhead of the day school. 

ADMINISTRATION 

An expense per pupil in average daily attendance of 
$6.94 for administration (Table II) is higher than is 
generally reported for such service. However, before 
judgment is passed the services covered should be care- 
fully scrutinized. Administration, as the term is em- 
ployed here, draws a clear line between the services of 
those who direct and control the work of others, and 
the services of those actually engaged in doing things, 
whether it be running a boiler or teaching a class. On 
the basis of this division, this report includes under ad- 
ministration services not ordinarily covered (for ex- 
ample, supervision), and omits other services ordinarily 
included (such as compulsory attendance and medical 
inspection). Therefore, when the per pupil expense for 
administration is reported as $6.94, it should be under- 
stood that this covers all services having to do with the 
direction and control of the day schools, whether the 
legislative direction and control of the board of educa- 
tion, the executive direction and control of the super- 
intendent, the supervisory control of property or in- 
struction, or the managerial direction and control of 
school principals. For this reason, it is not out of place to 
caution against hasty comparisons of administration cost. 



12 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

It is equally important before passing judgment 
to understand how expense charges are made; that 
is, whether the day schools carry the entire expense 
of a given kind of administrative service or only a 
part of it. 

For example, the board of education and the super- 
intendent direct and control the day schools, but they 
perform a like service for the Saturday schools, the night 
schools, the summer schools, and the Sunday schools. 
Nevertheless, the Gary auditor charges the totals of all 
such expense — as is the common practice — against the 
day school. Hence, the reported expenses of the board 
and of the superintendent of schools (Tables II and III) 
are the totals for these purposes. 

Certain public school accountants hold that it is 
unfair to charge the entire expense of the board and 
superintendent against the day school, on the ground 
that such expenses should be apportioned among the dif- 
ferent types of schools. While we agree with this posi- 
tion in theory, we have not seen any satisfactory basis 
for such distribution — whether the proposed basis is the 
total direct cost of the several activities, or teacher in- 
struction hours, 1 or pupil instruction hours. 2 Therefore, 

1 A teacher instruction hour is a clock hour's service on the part of a 
single teacher. 

J A pupil instruction hour is the reception on the part of a single pupil 
of a clock hour's instruction. 

The pupil instruction hours, exclusive of the Sunday schools, rendered 
by the different branches of the service in 1915-1916, were: 



Day schools . . . 5,515,575 
Saturday schools . . 106,978 
Night schools . . . 167,984 



Summer schools . . 80,465 

Total ..... 5,871,002 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 



!3 



sag £ 
« , < ss 

E2 ti f* H S 

iz s w 8 S 

w g > 2 w 

ft S < t 



<5 COM in 
W OO 00 






S &• v o X 



°73 






^^r ft a 

'J1 rr. • 



w 





ID 


^ 


(ON 


rf 


W 




(M 








CM-* 


to 


t> 


TtO) 


t> 


H 
O 


-# 


in 




c~ 








$ 




-tfO> 


w 


CXI 






■"1 


CO 


(O 


CO 


-*co 


■* 














tXO 


on 
















CM 




3 


,_i 


ION 


t> 


1° 


t^cq 




gw 
w 












CO 







^1-1 














wm 


-# 


N 














•<*co 


N 


60- 






t-H 






8 



STANTS 
AND 
KATIVE 
3RCE 




8 








in-* 

•-105 


S3 


a? 


ID 

ID 




in 

9 






CO 




















$ P< 














» 


< O 
















01 
0) W 


in 


8 





8 


8 


88 


in 

CO 


3 O H 


CO 

5 


S 


00 


g 


8 


100 


<D 


H 


CO 


CO 





00 


IflO 


Tf 








10 




<0!O 



















g s 

8- & 



s s 



a s 

B s 



i 4 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

until an appropriate basis of distribution is experimen- 
tally determined it is altogether proper, we believe, 
either to treat the expenses of the board and of the 
superintendent as an overhead charge against the entire 
system, or to debit such expenses — as is now the com- 
mon practice as well as the practice at Gary — against 
the day school. 

The Gary authorities likewise charge the entire ex- 
pense of property supervision against the day school. 
That is, the 44 cents per pupil for property supervision 
(Tables II and III) represents the total amount spent on 
this service, which at Gary has to do with the oversight of 
heat and power plants only. Since several kinds of 
schools use the same heat and power equipment, it 
would seem proper to apportion such supervision among 
the different organizations occupying the same building. 
But an equitable distribution of such expense is now, 
as we shall see in connection with the operation and up- 
keep of buildings, next to an impossible task. At any 
rate, we have made no attempt to apportion it, leaving 
the entire expense of property supervision against the 
day school as debited by the Gary authorities. 

The expense of instructional supervision is, however, 
handled differently. The $1.81 per pupil for instruc- 
tional supervision (Tables II and III) is only such part 
of the total expense for the system as the Gary authori- 
ties have charged or apportioned to the day school. 
In fact, the contracts of the supervisors are so drawn as 
to divide this expense. For example, the director of 




Uh 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 



IS 



night schools is also engaged for part day and full 
Saturday service; another is employed for regular day, 
Saturday, and evening schools; and still others, for the 
day school only. Again, supervisors are guaranteed work 
beyond what their contracts call for, and they receive 
additional pay for what they do. To illustrate: B's con- 
tract is for the day and Saturday schools at a salary of 
$2,000, which is apportioned $1,800 to the day school and 
$200 to the Saturday school. But B works also in the 
summer, earning $408 (Table IV). Similarly, D's regular 
day school salary is $1,100, but Saturday, evening, 
summer, and Sunday service raises the total to $1,964. 
As a result of so employing supervisors and of so dis- 
tributing their salaries, only $7,462, or 67 per cent, of 
the total for supervision, is chargeable to the day school. x 
The growing diversity of public education furnishes 
good reasons for engaging supervisors for specific tasks 
and for dividing the cost on a service base. But the 
respective charges at Gary — 67 per cent, to the regular 
day school, 8 per cent, to the Saturday school, 8 per 

1 Supervisors receive pay only for what they do in the summer and 
Sunday schools. This also holds for the Saturday and night schools 
in the case of supervisors C and D. The salaries and expenses of the 
remaining three are apportioned as follows: 



SUPERVISORS 

(see table rv) 


DAY SCHOOL 


SATURDAY SCHOOL 


NIGHT SCHOOL 


A* (theoretically) 

B 

E 


33f% 

90 % 
70% 


3l% 

10% 
10% 


20% 



•A receives theoretically 62J per cent, of his salary as director of night school. 



i6 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



> 
i— i 

W 

PQ 

< 



o 

h-l 
CO 

> 

w 



m 

«: 
o 

H 
U 

« 
H 



< 
H 
O 

H 

ft 

o 

5? 

o 

a 

H 





hH 


















O 
















O 
















tn 


o 


o 




o 


IG 




o 


o 




o 


o" 






lO 


irf 




id 




>■ 


lO 


w 




U3 






< 
a 
g 


€«• 


so- 




««■ 



































o 


tn 














Hi 














H 


O 
















O 


OS ^ ^ ^ 

tj< oq toco 




t- 


CM 


o 




Q 


a 


t- 


p 


t- 


ia 


T—I 




u 


cmco oood 


C\ 


i-i 


t^ 


i-i 


t> 


en 


too «oo 


Tt 


oo 


00 


i—i 


1—1 


O 


« 


uo "<* cm ia 


t~ 


* 




°1 




H 


W 










1-4" 




« 




eo- 


«3- 




€«■ 




O 
















ft 
















ft 
















< 

o 


tn 














h1 

o 
o 














oo 


c 


OS 


i-H 


o 




Eh 


a 


pp 


c 


00 


"tf 


oo 


CO 


u 


CJO 


C\ 


CO 


rji 


■* 


oo 


g 


tn 


CO o 


CC 


Oi 


co 


CM 




H 


CO"* 


t~ 






Oi 








se- 


€«• 




€«• 




< 

Q 
W 
O 
« 
< 


















Hi 
O 

o 
W 
o 


OO 100 


IH 


co 


CO 


(O 


IT. 




u 


< 

a 

H 


op cmo 


CN 


r-j 


co 


t^; 


I> 




100 ^io 


o 


<D 


t-^ 


(M 




H 


CM O 00 O 


c 


CD 


CO 


■** 




« 


i-KM t-ICM 


t- 






co 




< 
fa 


6^ 


€/3- 




€«■ 






«< 
















tn 
















Hi 

o 


OOOOO 


C 


itO 


t- 


CM 


co 






o 


oppop 


c 


T-H 


CM 


•^ 


?D 




W 


LOOOOO 


lit 


co 


oi 


CM 


CO 




o 


CM O to O O 


t- 


■* 


00 


CO 






en 


i -L cc L r ~L y ~~L'^l. 


iT. 


*tf 


"* 


■<# 






> 


TH^i-T-r-Tr-l i-T 


cc 






t-" 






< 


€«■ 


€«• 




€©■ 






Q 














m 


OS""#OOStj< 


cr 


" OS 


CO 


CO 






■ j a 


rj< 00 O fc-; 00 


cr 


t-; 


t-; 


■"*. 






< « 


oaooo "# co 


cc 


co 


00 


«o 






H < 


,-ioiocoo 


Tj 


OS 


U5 


OS 






° d 


CO Tl<_THC^kO 


cc 


CO 


«o 


T— < 






H < 
tn 


i-TcM^i-Ti-TcNf 


os" 






















^ 








CD • T3 


H : 




o 


tn 
O 

W 






y ■ d 

sfl : * 


g 

l 


H 
*o 


ft 


<JpqUQf£] 


B 

c 


-SJ 


en 

S d 


d 

a 


-H 

d 
<u 
u 





3 




E- 


cT fa g-o a 

^ CO 


u 

P. 





COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 17 

cent, to the night school, and 1 7 per cent, to the summer 
school (Table IV) — suggest either inadequate provision 
in some directions, or an unequal distribution. 

The differences in cost for the same unit of supervisory 
service in the several branches of the service point to the 
latter view. For when supervision expense as now dis- 
tributed is compared on the basis of teacher instruction 
hours, supervision costs 5.0 cents per teacher instruction 
hour in the regular day school; 13.4 cents in the Satur- 
day school; 9.3 cents in the night school; and 26.4 cents 
in the summer school. 1 (Table V.) 

These differences are striking. Yet the comparison 
can hardly be called unfair. There are enough teachers 2 
in any one of these different kinds of schools to consume 
the full time of a supervisor , so that the cost of a reason- 
able amount of supervision in any type of school should 
not be unusual. 

Under these conditions, it is certainly difficult to 
justify a relatively higher expenditure for Saturday and 
summer school supervision, where instruction is chiefly 
drill and review, than for regular day school supervision. 
Besides, summer service on the part of supervisors is 
regarded in most systems as essential to the efficiency 
of the regular day school, and is provided for as part 
of their regular service and pay. During the vacation 
months, plans are matured and materials prepared, in 



'Teacher instruction hours are taken as the basis of comparison, 
for the reason that supervisors deal principally with teachers. 
2 See The Gary Public Schools: A General Account. 



i8 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 




53 S^3 SS 

S H SU 

■2 «j t-i Ed 

o « « " 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 19 

order that supervision may not suffer during the regular 
school time. The wording of the contracts with the 
supervisors does not really alter the fact that the prac- 
tice at Gary conforms to common usage. As elsewhere, 
the day school is the arch of the system, and to the 
policies and practices of the day school, supervisors 
give the lion's share of their energies during both the 
regular school year and the summer. 

In any case it is not apparent why supervision should 
not be provided in the different types of schools at ap- 
proximately the same cost per teacher instruction hour 
rate. Were this done, the amounts now charged to 
the different schools would be materially altered. To 
illustrate: Should the total now spent on supervision, 
exclusive of the charge against the Sunday school, be 
distributed among the various branches of the system 
on the basis of the present average cost per teacher in- 
struction hour for supervision (6.4 cents), $9,640.76, or 
86 per cent, of the entire expenditure, would go to the 
regular day school (Table VI), and the per pupil cost of 
day school supervision would become $2.33 instead of 
$1.81, as reported above. 

The Gary authorities pursue a similar method in 
charging and apportioning the salaries of school prin- 
cipals. In the first place, the contracts of principals 
and supervisors are much alike. Those of the principals 
call for full week-day service and salaries are apportioned 
90 per cent, to the regular day and 10 per cent, to 
the Saturday school. Summer service is guaranteed 



20 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 






PS 


►j 


_, 




w 


o 
o 




U5 U5 


H 


w 


Ph S °5 




CJ 


u 


u H 




< 


en 










w 


* 


« 1 


o o 


H 


<! 


§ 


o p 






o 


U3 U3 




p 

en 


1! 


to >o 

09- 


Ph 








w 


i-) 

o 


m +J oi 


tH r-j 




o 

w 

o 


£ S <=,o 




w 




O CM 


1 


Pi 
W 


3 
o 


iq co 

t— I CO 


fH -—v 


3 

en 


6 


°i. ""* 


5£ 


< 


os- 


co 5? 








S3 8 


o 


eu d ^! ii 


oo t-; 


o 
a 
o 

en 


fL, S o o 

" o E-h 


co «i 


!z:3 


3 

3 
o 

a 
< 


O CO 


co < 


H 

c 

2 


00 U3 

->* co 

CM CO 

<ji co 

«/3- 


o 
o 
W 
u 
en 


J-* 4-J ci 


lO CO 


^ 


^ U E-H 


t> co 


2* 

co o 


< 






3 

3 


eo t- 

t-; 00 


w P 


b 


O 


CNl oi 


H 
< 
en 


a 
< 


"* o 
CO ■<# 
©9- 




c/o £ 




l 




£ 




M -i-5 . oi 


CO !-j 


H 


i-l 
O 

o 
X 
u 




co co 
co oo 


o 


-4-> 


(M CO 


H 


en 


a 


Tt< t-; 




!* 


3 


CNJ O 


P>h 


<! 


O 


co -^ 


O 


Q 


a 


"**„ «» 






< 


t-" <jf 


^ 






©9- 


O 








p 






40 -d • 


w 






-3 3 


a 






0-° : 


H 






-iS 


co 






«* "S h 


M 






3 .2 * 


P 






'5b T3?^ 


P4 


1 





COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 21 

besides, and there is also opportunity for night 
work. To illustrate: Of A's regular salary, $2,000, 
$1,800 is charged to the day and $200 to the Satur- 
day school; while the summer netted him $370. Again, 
D earned a total of $1,422, apportioned and charged 
as follows: day school, $990; Saturday school, $110; 
night school, $104; and summer school, $2i8. 1 (Table 
VII.) 

Sound business policy requires the division of mana- 
gerial expense among the different organizations operat- 
ing in the same building. Where the personnel of the 
management is the same in the regular day, Saturday, 
and summer schools, as it is at Gary, the cost for the 
same unit of similar service ought not to vary greatly 
for the different organizations. But as apportioned 
and charged at Gary, building management costs, per 
100 pupil instruction hours, 12^ cents in the regular 
day schools, 74 cents in both Saturday and night schools, 
and $1.57 in the summer schools. These radical differ- 
ences suggest that the charge against the Saturday 
and summer schools is too heavy, thus lessening the load 
of the regular day schools. 

Experience may demonstrate that the pupil instruc- 
tion hour is not a fair base on which to apportion build- 

1 Supplies and clerical assistance are in part charged direct and in 
part apportioned. For example, summer school supplies are charged 
to the summer schools; all others are apportioned, 80 per cent, to the 
day schools, 10 per cent, to the Saturday schools, and 10 per cent, to 
the night schools. Clerical assistance for night and summer schools is 
charged direct, but that for the day and Saturday schools is divided 
90 per cent, to the one and 10 per cent, to the other. 



22 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



w 


























>-) 












o 
o 

M 












^ o co io 


<M 


t- 


05 




u 


oopoqt-^ 


•«* 


00 


t- 


CO 


Cfl 


Oirfood 


lO 


^J< 


O* 


OJ 




t-OJt-H 


OS 


<o 


kO 


rH 


MMNN 


rH 




N 




a 




T-T 




rH 






««- 


&■ 




evs- 




en 












en 












i-l 












o 
o 


O O 


o 


lOO 


lO 




M 


O O 


o 


t-; 6 -: 


-* 


(M 


o 


->* O 


■<*' 


COrH 


oS 


e>i 


C/3 


O i-( 


T- 1 


-<*oo 


co 


rH 




rH ©„ 


r-j 




<M„ 




w 

o 


rH~ 


r-i 




tH" 




«9- 


o* 




«9- 




S 












en 












hi 












o 












o 
a 












ooooooo 


o 


coo 


co 




en 


ppppooo 


o 


CD U3 


T-J 


00 


:* 


ooooooo 


o 


o'o 


rH 


t-^ 


ooeoHrtHH 


c~ 


«o co 


<3> 




< 


CM CM rHrH 


co 




tr- 




3 
5 


<y> 


09 




ee- 














H 












< 












en 












en 












i-l 


ooooooo 


o 


TfO 


•"* 




O 
O 
W 
o 

CO 


ppppopo 


o 


C5CM 


1-1 


t- 


ooooooo 


o 


co'oS 


CO 


t^ 


OO t-05 05C35 


CO 


-<*<M 


o 


CO 


o0 J x L T ~l. ai 


o 


IOCO 


o 






i-Tt-Tr-T 


co 




co" 




>< 


©9- 


©9- 


60- 




<! 












O 














'JOMIOOOOO 


CM 


NO 


s 




k) 


ooooot-oooo 


"^ 


t-T# 




2 


dlOONCJOOO 


OS 


la-i-i 


co 




H 


t»Mt«NOOOH 


o 


Ht- 


o 




O 
H 


eo_co io^hhhO, 


o 


t-T* 


1-t 




WOfiHt-T rH 


05 




o" 






*9- 






rH 








w- 


«©• 


3 








1 • 




03 

1-1 




















*j . in 


3 


s 


< 




















en • O 


o 




g 


< 


PC 


c 


p 


£ 


pt 


c 


1-c 

6 


3 

£ 


ages of A 
ants 
ther Expe 


H 

a 


o 
a 

8 


















o 




& 6 





■a a 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 23 

ing administration expense. Yet in the absence of 
scientific proof to the contrary, there is much to com- 
mend it. Should the average total building administra- 
tion expenditure in all branches of the system for each 
100 pupil instruction hours (17.4 cents) be used as the 
base for redistributing the total spent during 1915-1916 
on principals, $9,579, or 94 per cent., would be charged 
to the regular day school, where our experience with 
principals convinces us that it belongs; for, although on 
duty Saturdays and during the summer, principals are 
at all times engrossed chiefly in regular day school 
problems. But so to redistribute the cost of managerial 
direction and control would raise the per pupil cost for 
principals from $1.67, as now reported (Tables II and 
III), to $2.32. 

GENERAL SERVICES 

As pointed out before, we have grouped all overhead 
expenditures, other than expenditures for administra- 
tion, under General Services. Of these overhead charges, 
it is enough to say that, with the exception of the items 
Provision and Storage of Supplies, and Transportation, 
the reported expenditures (Table II) are the totals for 
these purposes. In the case of Provision and Storage 
of Supplies, and Transportation, the reported amounts 
are the undistributed balances after all legitimate charges 
against specific organizations have been made. 

The only item requiring special comment is the 18 
cents per pupil for Attendance Enforcement (Table II), 



24 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

which is unusually small. Taking the country as a 
whole, attendance enforcement is a local matter, for 
which the local school organization bears the entire 
expense. In Indiana, however, attendance enforce- 
ment is largely a county affair, the county paying the 
bulk of the cost. Accordingly, Gary is at little expense 
for compulsory attendance, the total expenditure for 
1915-1916 amounting to $730. Even this sum includes 
$485 allowed to principals as a special fund on the 
ground that teachers make the annual school enumera- 
tion. In fact, the salary and contingent expenses of the 
attendance officer paid by Gary aggregated only $245; 
this is, of course, in addition to what he receives from 
the county. Nothing could show more clearly than this 
simple item of attendance enforcement the danger of 
making cost comparisons between various cities unless 
the person making the comparison is familiar with the 
service, the conditions under which it is rendered, and 
how it is financed in the different cities compared. 

OPERATION OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS 

If we now turn to other than overhead expenditures, 
we find an even greater variety of ways of making charges 
and we also perceive that in a complex system such as 
that of Gary it is extremely difficult to report with ex- 
actness the actual cost of specific services. This is well 
illustrated in the attempt to determine the cost of 
plant operation. 

The per pupil building and ground operation cost is 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 25 

reported as $6.39 (Table II). This covers the usual 
items of personal service, such as engineers and jani- 
tors, and also fuel, water, light, supplies, and miscellane- 
ous expenses. (Table VIII.) But this amount does 
not represent the direct expenditure in respect to these 
objects for the day schools; it is merely an estimate of 
the portion of the total expense of building and ground 
operation that the day school should bear. 

The necessity of apportioning such expenses arises 
from the fact that each large building houses a number 
of separate school organizations. For example, the 
Emerson building shelters four kinds of schools; but 
there is only one coal-bin, one water-meter, and one 
gas-meter. Even under these circumstances, some 
operation expenditures become a direct debit against 
particular activities; for the most part, however, ex- 
penses incurred must be apportioned. Obviously, the 
reliability of the apportionment depends on the care 
and judgment exercised; obviously, good public school 
accounting depends not only on having well-determined 
bases of apportionment, but also on having proper classi- 
fication of expenditures. 

Generally speaking, building operation expenditures 
at Gary are apportioned on the basis of the relative 
amount of time each kind of school uses each plant. 
These proportions differ with the building, owing to the 
different uses to which the various plants are put. 
(Table LX.) For example, at Emerson the theoretical 
base (with the summer school excluded) was, for 19 15- 



26 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



p 

o 
O 

Q 



s 

o 



W 

CM 

O 

o 



w 

X 
P4 



m d ^ 

lis 



K * •< 



w o as 
u a w 

gig 



IaS 



' rid 




8 wow 




3L 



o5„ 


§8 


sg 


OS 


(0 


o) H u 

8 £ H 










S 


CO 00 


«£ 


in 




S0 


CO 00 


CO 

















:| : :! 












Grounds 
ght, and 

e 

il Servic 
uilding 






o^S- 


"t3 


Heat 

Sei 

Janit 

Othe 


£ 





COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 



27 



1916, 56 per cent, to the day school, 12 per cent, to the 
Saturday school, 20 per cent, to the night school, and 
12 per cent, to the Sunday school. In contrast, at Jef- 
ferson 72 per cent, went to the day school, 10 per cent, 
to the Saturday school, and 18 per cent, to the night 
school. 

TABLE LX 

Theoretical Bases (1915-1916) for Distributing Plant 
Operation Cost, Exclusive of the Summer School 



Plant 



Emerson 

Froebel 

Jefferson 

Beveridge .... 
Glen Park. . . 
Other Schools 



TO THE 


TO THE 


TO THE 


DAY 


SATURDAY 


NIGHT 


SCHOOL 


SCHOOL 


SCHOOL 


56% 


12% 


20% 


56% 


12% 


20% 


72% 


10% 


18% 


80% 


12% 


8% 


80% 


12% 


8% 


85% 


10% 


5% 



TO THE 
SUNDAY 
SCHOOL 

12% 
12% 



These bases of apportionment are called theoretical, 
because they do not conform to the actual use of build- 
ings and because in actual accounting there are numerous 
deviations from them. (Table X.) For example, engineers 
and janitors are, as a rule, paid direct for night and Sunday 
work, which leaves only their regular wages to be divided 
between the day and Saturday schools, generally 87^ 
per cent, to the one and i2§ per cent, to the other. 
Again, in some schools 10 per cent, of the water expense 
is charged to the summer school and the balance is 
apportioned 72 per cent, to the day, 10 per cent, to the 



28 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 






o 
o 
W 
o 

F=H 
O 

cfl 

Q 

s 



& & 



coco 















■8-9 

o g 



5 ■" 



S-9 
3 ca 






"3 3 

M Q 

ca d 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 29 

Saturday, and 18 per cent, to the night school. At 
other buildings, for example, Emerson and Froebel, 
water charges are divided 50 per cent, to the day, 12 
per cent, to the Saturday, 20 per cent, to the night, 
12 per cent, to the Sunday, and 6 per cent, to the sum- 
mer school. The result is that the reported plant opera- 
tion expenditures for the day schools — and for all schools, 
for that matter — are made up of two classes of items, 
direct charges for specific services and charges made 
after the cost of the service is divided among a few or 
all of the different kinds of schools. The amount and 
the per cent, of the total plant operation expenditures 
actually charged and apportioned at each plant to 
each kind of school were as in Table XI. 

To apportion plant operation expenditures is in the 
highest degree difficult. For example, how shall the 
coal bill be divided? Modern school buildings must be 
kept at all times above the freezing point, whether or 
not there is a Saturday or night or Sunday school. What 
is the additional fuel cost to raise the temperature to 
the point of comfort for these activities? The wages of 
engineers and janitors are equally difficult to handle. 
Ordinarily, engineers and janitors are hired by the month 
or by the year, working six or seven days a week. They 
use Saturday for general cleaning and minor repairs, and 
must keep the fires under their boilers on Sunday; during 
the summer they are busy overhauling buildings and 
equipment. When Saturday and summer schools are 
inaugurated, shall the wages of engineers and janitors, 



30 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



X 



o 



w 
O 

H 
| 

3 

o 
H 

O 

o 

H 

P 

m 
i— i 

H 









IO00 00 



t) 0) <u JJ 

££33 



NMinN N 



o 
o 

M 

u 


0) 


ssss 


- 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 31 

as is the common practice, be charged entirely against 
the day schools, or shall, as at Gary, their salaries for 
two months be charged to the summer schools, and 
a sixth of their wages for the remaining ten months be 
debited to the Saturday schools? No satisfactory 
answer is at hand to these and other questions. 

At all events, experience has demonstrated that plant 
operation expenditures cannot be apportioned equit- 
ably, at least at Gary, on the base of plant instruction 
hour use. This base equalizes, for all kinds of schools, 
plant instruction hour cost, irrespective of whether the 
school is conducted in the daytime, at night, in the 
winter, or in the summer. Obviously, the cost is 
not the same. Summer schools burn little or no fuel, 
day schools do not use as much light as night schools, 
nor do the different kinds of schools require an equal 
amount of janitorial service. The Gary authorities, 
therefore, in apportioning operation cost, make many 
departures from the single base of plant instruction 
hour use, although they adopt it as their guide. 

To apportion plant operation expenditures on the base 
of pupil instruction hours would hardly prove more 
satisfactory. This base emphasizes attendance but 
ignores the fact that there are elements of cost in heat- 
ing, lighting, and caring for a plant altogether inde- 
pendent of the number of pupils in attendance; hence, 
this base tends to lessen the operation burden of auxiliary 
activities and to overload the day school. 

If a single base of distribution is to be employed, 



32 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



room instruction hour use has much to commend it. 
In the first place, it minimizes attendance, so prominent 
in the pupil instruction hour base, and, in the second 
place, it distributes, in contrast to the plant instruction 
hour base, the operation cost in view of the portion of the 
plant actually employed. Nevertheless, we hesitate to 
reapportion the building operation expenditures at Gary 
even on this base 

Ten months' contact with Gary conditions and test 
tabulations incline us to the opinion that no single 
basis of apportioning plant operation expenditures will 
prove satisfactory. The solution lies, we believe, in 
developing for each plant, depending on the uses to 
which it is put, a number of bases built up around room 
instruction hour use; for example, one base for heat 
and another for light, one for engineers and still another 
for janitors, and so on for each major item of operation 
expenditure; but the derivation of such bases must 
await cost accounting and detailed data on the time, 
pupil, teacher, and room use of buildings by the different 
school organizations. 

TABLE XII 
Plant Instruction Hour Operation Cost 



PLANT 


DAY 
SCHOOL 


SATURDAY 
SCHOOL 


NIGHT 
SCHOOL 


SUMMER 
SCHOOL 


SUNDAY 
SCHOOL 


Emerson 


$5.73 
6.62 
1.18 


$5.38 

6.57 
1.14 


$7.74 
8.28 
1.85 


$3.72 

4.31 

.58 


$8.11 

9.76 





COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 33 

The success of the Gary authorities in apportioning 
plant operation expenditures can probably be best 
judged from a comparison of building instruction hour 
operation cost charged at the largest plants against 
each school organization. These charges for 1915-1916 
were as in Table XII. 

UPKEEP OF BUILDINGS, GROUNDS, AND GENERAL EQUIP- 
MENT 

In contrast with the method of handling plant opera- 
tion cost, the Gary authorities have never attempted to 
apportion upkeep expenditures. To be sure, upkeep 
bills were formerly debited, when paid, to the day or 
to the summer school, according as the one or the other 
was in session; but this practice is now abandoned, as it 
should be, so that all upkeep expenses are charged to 
the day schools, and the reported $3.20 per pupil cost 
(Table II) is the total expenditure for 1915-1916. (Table 
XIII.) 

But this $3.20 per pupil upkeep cost does not repre- 
sent direct cash outlay. Repairs and replacements at 
Gary are inseparably bound up with the school shops. 
As pointed out elsewhere, 1 the school shops do real work. 
They have the first chance on all repairs and replace- 
ments, and are paid (credited) for what they do as if 
they were privately owned and conducted. What actu- 
ally happens is: A shop undertakes a repair job, against 
which is charged the cost of materials used and the 

1 In the volume dealing with Industrial Work. 



34 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



X 

H 
►J 
PQ 



55 

W 
ft 
X 

w 

Pm 

M 
P 

o* 

H 

1-1 

<! 

W 
15 

W 

O 
p 

55 



p 

55 
P 
O 

o 



o 

Pm 

W 

w 

M 





PER 
PUPIL 
COST 


00i-*eo 


00 


o 






t-JOCJ OS 
"r-i r-i 


CM 






ee- 


«/» 






PER 
CENT. 

OF 
TOTAL 


COiOr-J 00 








kOr-iiH 1-5 








eo co 










Ht-^< CO 


00 








■<*cocd t-. 


i-H 






1-5 
< 
H 
O 


o-**' co oo 


© 






-<*coco co 


r-l 






C- r-lrH l-j 


CM 






H 


Tjf oo' 


CO 
1—1 

0» 






H 2 


i-H<M-<# co 


co 






ro H W 


csioco cm 


1—1 


t-: 




™ h?- s 

rt 3 ^ 

M < CM 


csieocd i« 


l> 


co 




^ ■"* eo co 


lO 






< •-) s 


CM i-Hi-l CO 


r-j 






Pm Pm P 




t-J 






W O 1 
« W 


so- 


«0 








us o 


W 






55 8 Z «> 

« p-J. <^ n 


cc iq 


00 


io 




r-i ed 


■<* 


t^ 




EPAI 
BUI 
GS A 

LAN' 


4,02 
7 53 


T- 


00 




«OgPH 


«©• 


1-1 






03 « 

B _ z 


o 


o 






CM 


<M 


CO 




REPA 

TC 

GROU 


CO 


co 


CO 




OS 


as 






-<* 


■«* 






ee- 


«/3 








• H ts 










. u 


c 










■"> 


si 










• 1H 












• <D 










O 


;CO 


en 
If 








s 


. 0> 
• & 


3 4. 

PA £ 

a c 








H 

CO 

w 
o 

I 


• o 

1 9 I 


< 


o 
H 




Is*,** 




<+H 




M 




o 






•S 
" 


£ 






° «o c 




V 






« -y .■y « 4 


c 


u 






all 


S 1 ^ 

Cg 


E- 





COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 35 

time (paid for at the union rate) it takes the instructor 
to do it himself, or his estimate of the time it would take 
him even when pupils do the work. 1 The shop is then 
credited with this amount and a corresponding debit 
entered against upkeep. Accordingly, there is no little 
uncertainty as to actual upkeep expenditures 2 or what 
these would be, were repairs and replacements made as 
in conventional systems. 

Even if the reported $3.20 per pupil upkeep expendi- 
ture is the actual cost to Gary, there is no good reason 
why this should all be borne by the day schools. Un- 
questionably, Saturday schools, night schools, etc., in- 
volve additional wear and tear of grounds, buildings, 
and general equipment. There are, however, no ap- 
proved bases of distribution. Time and use are, of 
course, the two chief factors in deterioration. For prac- 
tical purposes, time may be eliminated, leaving only 
use to be considered. Thus considered, upkeep cost for 
each building might be apportioned on the basis of plant 
instruction hour use, or on the basis of pupil instruc- 
tion hours, or on the basis of room instruction hour 
use. The first ignores difference in wear and tear due 
to differences in attendance, and the second disregards 
deterioration due merely to opening up a plant. The 
last or room instruction hour base has some advan- 



1 Methods of determining shop production cost and of making credits 
and charges are discussed fully in the chapter on Shop Cost. 

"This is also partially true of operation and capital outlay expen- 
ditures, for the shops furnish operation supplies and work on new con- 
struction as well. 



36 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

tages. It equalizes differences in wear and tear from 
attendance, and it takes account, at least to a certain 
extent, of the deteriorating effects of putting a plant 
into operation. For these reasons, it appears to be the 
preferable base. But if used at all, it should be em- 
ployed advisedly, for no apportionment basis can be 
confidently employed until its worth has been scien- 
tifically demonstrated. 

On a room instruction hour basis of distribution, 
the regular day school would carry, even when the 
Sunday school is eliminated, only 87 per cent, of the 
upkeep burden, 1 and the per pupil upkeep cost would be 
$2.77 instead of the reported $3.20. 

instruction: teachers' salaries 

As in other systems, the largest single item of expense 
is teachers' salaries, amounting at Gary to 59 per cent, 
of the total. (Table II.) However, the reported ex- 
penditure of $29.20 per pupil in average daily attendance 
is not an out and out cash outlay, for even here we are 
not free from divisions and apportionments, involving 
complicated accounting problems. (Table XIV.) 

For example, at Glen Park the manual training 
teacher's salary is first divided equally between instruc- 
tion and plant operation. Plant operation carries a half, 
for the reason that the instructor is expected, through 
the boys whom he trains, to keep the boilers of the six- 

1 The basis of this distribution was in fact teacher instruction hours, 
which differs at most only slightly from room instruction hours. ' 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 37 

room building going during the day. The instruction 
burden, already halved, is further reduced by credits 
for production. The result is that out of a regular annual 
salary of $1,000 only $418 is charged against instruction. 

At Jefferson and Beveridge the practice is reversed — 
custodians become teachers. To illustrate: At Jefferson 
the custodian's wage is divided one part to plant opera- 
tion and two to instruction; this latter debit is made on 
the ground that the custodian at times looks after boys 
in the shop and also teaches them how to run the engine 
and to care for the boiler. The instruction charge is 
next subdivided, five-sixths to the day and one-sixth to 
the Saturday school, to be reduced in each case by pro- 
duction credits. Accordingly, the final disposition of 
this custodian's total wage ($1,034.45) is: $283.44 as 
custodian, divided among the day, Saturday, and night 
schools; $423.15 as day school teacher; $24.57 f° r Satur- 
day instruction; and $303.29 against upkeep and capital 
outlay. 

It is not worth while to attempt to unravel this tangled 
skein to show how these salaries and wages would be 
apportioned on a strict work-time basis, for there are 
also far-reaching practical and educational policies in- 
volved. It suffices for our purpose to call attention to 
this practice as a factor that affects instruction cost. 

The method of handling the wages of shopmen also 
requires examination. The shopmen at Gary are not 
licensed teachers; with few exceptions, they are journey- 
men accustomed to work and to receive pay for six days 



38 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



> ^ 

X & 

1—1 w 

< a 

H < 



t-t- 

tow 
oTcf 



CO OJ CO CO CO 



OKO 



cow 
odoi 
S3 
co"*f 



{£>W 



aJ W 

£ s 

w 



i^ 



& o 



sS 



CO 


o> 


ICH 


00 


T* 




CO 


iH 


<M 









<O«O00rHU5 
t-; OS T* CO i-H 

<«* «0 CO CM t- 



ON 

ooo 

OCS1 

oo~<m~ 
t- 



lOOOOOt- 

n io p oq «-h 
t>ooo t-oi 

MOOOHIO 
HCONOM 

co"c<rco''c<fc<r 



cot- t-o 
iooo ho 

csfof eo e4* 




i «« j3 m 05250- 
i^^UPqN gPfi-o, 

HH 

m m 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 



«Hoori<Tt<«0-«ii©©t-t-oa© 
t-;ooeoo<x>oO5Oir3eo«0-*© 

«DCT>CO«d©'u3©i-iTj<i-i©«D 
Cq»Qe<3i-HC<li-HkO©t-u30000 
WC^O»©©C^C<1t-IOSIO<NOO 



39 



©t-©ooi©g>t-(M 

Wi-jNOTfOpOOO 
t>©lOi-ioOOO©©5Tii 
CO N © © •<* 
i-l (M 



© 



ooi-it-c<>e<3c^©©ooir-coto 

©O5O5O5i-j©W-^lO©00(M 

ooiG>©©©eot>co©i-i©'io 

eo©c<ioocoi— ir-nooowt-w 

i-l tH © CO •»* tH tH C-WNOO 



8 2 



• a bo oj o o^ tr 
■a-S g bo u B u a « » 

**p 3 C5 S ii,3 R o 






4 o THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

a week. Where licensed teachers are similarly engaged, 
although they are busy Saturdays helping boys, caring 
for tools, and preparing materials, their salaries are 
debited to the day schools, but at Gary only five-sixths 
of all shop wages are so charged. The situation is fur- 
ther complicated by the use of productive shops and 
shop credits. In fact, the credits for production against 
manual training and shop instructors' time in 1915-1916 
amounted to more than half of the total shop payroll, 
which, exclusive of mechanical drawing but including 
manual training, amounted for both regular and Satur- 
day schools to $17,826. 11, 1 leaving a net shop wage 
charge against the day schools of only $7, 096.68, 2 and 
against the Saturday schools of $i,i56.66. 3 Even if 
these final net charges are taken at their face value, it 
appears that manual and industrial instruction costs 
almost as much on Saturday as on a regular school day, 
an apportionment which can scarcely be justified in 
view of the difference between week-day and Saturday 
attendance. 

Finally, it is necessary to keep in mind, when dis- 
cussing instruction cost, that much of what is done in 
the Gary Saturday schools is accomplished elsewhere 
as a part of the regular day school work. To illustrate: 
In other cities lessons lost by absence are made up after 
school, and, besides classes for defectives and the tuber- 



1 Table XIX. 

2 Schedule H-2 of the Appendix. 

3 Schedule H-3 of the Appendix. 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 41 

cular, there are often classes (usually small) for fast, 
slow, and backward children; also "coaches" in large 
buildings for groups and individuals requiring special 
assistance. The additional expenditures for these pur- 
poses are included in the day school cost, making it 
higher than it would be were most of such expense 
charged, as at Gary, against a Saturday school. 

instruction: supplies and equipment upkeep 

A further element in instruction cost is the expenditure 
for instructional supplies and equipment upkeep, amount- 
ing to a per pupil charge of $1.78. (Table II.) The 
actual expenditure, however, for instructional supplies 
as this term is generally used aggregates only 52 cents 
per pupil. (Table XIV.) The smallness of this sum 
may come as a surprise, but it is to be remembered that 
it covers only the incidentals used by the teachers, in- 
cluding also paper and the like handed out by them to 
pupils for special written work and examinations. 

The Gary authorities appreciate the desirability of 
providing all supplies and textbooks free of charge, but 
the Indiana law prevents. To overcome this obvious 
handicap, the teachers are allowed to collect from the 
children fees which are turned over to the principals, 
who buy the textbooks and other necessities called 
for by the course of study. These fees are not included 
in the reported cost of the Gary schools. The rates 
at which collections are made in any one year from the 
children are as follows: 



42 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

Kindergarten $ .00 

Grades 1 and 2 75 

Grades 3 and 4 1.50 

Grades 5, 6, 7, and 8 2.25 

High School (all classes) 3.00 



SUMMARY 

To summarize: When the $49.29 current expense per 
pupil in average daily attendance in the regular day 
schools is thus analyzed and the make-up of the several 
expense items described, it becomes apparent that $49.29 
is not an exact figure, but only an approximation. All 
that can be said is that this is the current operation ex- 
pense per pupil in average daily attendance when com- 
puted according to the bases of distribution prevailing 
at Gary, with only minor deviations therefrom on our 
part. As to the wisdom and correctness of these dis- 
tributions, opinion will differ. Exception may easily 
be taken to the way in which salaries of supervisors, 
principals, custodians, and shopmen are divided, or to 
the practice of charging the entire expense of building 
upkeep to the day schools, or to the manner in which 
certain other items are handled. Yet, after months of 
the minutest study of the Gary accounts, it is impossible, 
with the data at hand, to reconstruct them. For edu- 
cational cost accounting is exceedingly complicated, 
and while necessity compels the apportionment of any 
number of items, there is not to-day a single generally 
accepted basis of distribution, nor is there unanimity of 
opinion as to the classification of expenses. In short, 



COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 43 

the whole field of public school cost accounting, at least 
for complex school systems, is undeveloped. For this 
reason we caution once more against cost comparisons 
either between totals or between specific services, unless 
it is positively known that the same methods of classi- 
fication obtain, and that the division and apportionment 
of salaries, wages, and other expenses, ways of financing, 
and accounting methods are substantially identical. 



IV. CURRENT COST OF LARGER 
DAY SCHOOLS 

IS POINTED out elsewhere, Gary schools range 
/-\ from portables to large modern buildings. 1 The 
*~ -^ foregoing sections shed, therefore, little light on 
what a fully developed Gary system would cost. The 
nearest approach to an idea of such cost can be ob- 
tained from the Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson schools. 
The respective current expense per pupil in average 
daily attendance in these schools, as operated in 1915- 
19 1 6, was approximately as follows: 

TABLE XV 

Current Expense Per Pupil in Average Daily At- 
tendance at Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson Schools 



SCHOOL 


KINDER- 
GARTEN 


ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 
GRADES 


HIGH 
SCHOOL 


ALL 
GRADES 




i to 5 


6 to 8 


1 to 8 


Emerson 

Jefferson 


$46.83 
40.17 
31.67 


$64.49 
48.51 
34.89 


$74.58 
57.54 
33.97 


$68.75 
50.29 
34.64 


$90.80 

79.22 


$74.64 

52.37 
34.31 



A more detailed statement shows wherein the opera- 
tion expenses of these schools differ, and thus supplies 

1 See report on Organization and Administration. 

44 



COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 45 

the data for school to school comparison, also for compari- 
sons between the cost of particular services in these 
schools and in the system as a whole. 1 

When considering the respective current costs of the 
Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson schools, it should be borne 
in mind that Emerson — probably the best expression of 
the Gary idea — is working at hardly more than half 
capacity. This accounts in part for the present very 
high cost of plant operation, and may also affect some- 
what the per pupil instruction cost, although the teachers 
now engaged appear to be fully occupied. Froebel is 



1 In compiling the current cost of Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson, 
the same difficulties were encountered with respect to the division and 
apportionment of salaries, wages, and expenditures as were met when 
considering the cost of the system as a whole. It would be unprofitable 
to reconsider these; suffice it to say that no redistribution was attempted. 
It is, however, necessary to call attention to the manner in which we 
handled particular items. In the case of the board, the superintendent, 
supervisors both of property and of instruction; transportation; provision 
and storage of supplies; instruction of pupils in other institutions; branch 
libraries; compulsory attendance enforcement; and medical inspection 
service, the cost per pupil in average daily attendance for the system 
was charged alike in each school against the kindergarten, elementary 
grade groups, and the high school. Managerial as well as plant opera- 
tion and upkeep cost was handled in a like manner, except that here 
the per pupil cost for the building became the charge. Instruction cost 
was by far the most troublesome. As accounts are kept at Gary, there 
is no distinction between kindergarten, elementary, and high school. 
The same teacher, as a rule, has both elementary and secondary classes, 
and in the same class there are often different grades. Where it was 
necessary to apportion a teacher's salary, this was divided, when pos- 
sible, on the basis of the instruction periods given to the classes of the 
elementary divisions or the high school; otherwise it was divided on the 
basis of the number of pupils in a class from each of the different grade 
groups. Finally, instructional supplies and equipment upkeep was 
apportioned on the basis of the relation of the present charges to the 
different grades for supplies and textbooks; in this compilation, the 
charge for the kindergarten was considered the same as the present 
charge for the first and second grades. 



46 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



CO 
O 






I 

X p 

W w 

3 2 

a I 

• s 

Ph 

P4 

H 
Ph 



H 
55 





to 


lO 


t-ooo 


\a 


■>* i-H 


-# 


CD 00 


"^t 




39 


O 


N01> 


00 


o oo 


t- 


t- OS 


CD 


o 


lOCOr-i 


CD 


cm Tji 


t- 


CM ■<* 


^ 


1-1 




iH 


i-H 


"1< 


-«1< 


t- 


69- 












49- 


i-) 


iO 


t-ooo 


lO 


•>* T-t 


o 


t- CO 


1® 


&3 S 


O 


NOI> 


00 


o oq 


OS 


CD CM 


OO 


C5 O 

SB 


o 


socoi-i 


CD 


cm -^ 


CO 


t-I to 


S 


1—1 




i-H 


tH 


CD 


to 


os 




1 


00 


lO 


t-ooo 


lO 


-* l-l 


to 


OS CO 


»o 




5 


p 


NOI> 


00 


o 00 


00 


OS 00 


t-; 


o 


o 


iaco i-i 


CO 


CM x* 


i-i 


CD -<ji 


oo 




1—1 




tH 


1-1 


Tf 


CO 


CD 


M 


H 


€«■ 












««• 


O 






































o 


















o 


oo 


kO 


t-ooo 


»0 


■^t 1-4 


00 


r-l t- 


00 


8 


p 


NOt^ 


00 


o oc 


CD 


■»* CM 


to 


o 


o 


wieoi-i 


CD 


cm" x* 


t-^ 


s! «> 


^ 






iH 




i-H 


H 


■^ 


•<* 


t- 


>< 


o 


60- 












««• 


3 


















H 


















ss 


















u 




lO 


t-ooo 


ID 


■^ tH 


o 


CO CO 


OS 


3 




O 


cqpt-; 


oq 


o 0C 


la 


t> oc 


■^ 


w 
3 


o 


o 


uicorA 


CD 

l-H 


CM ** 

i-H 


CO 


co cc 

CO 


s 


w 


M 


"as- 












««• 


« 55 


»o 


t-ooo 


\a 


■«# i-l 


co 


O CO 


cc 




W 


w 


p 


CM.pt- 


oq 


o a 


(j> 


^ ©» 


oo 






o 


iocoth 


CD 


CM tt 


oi 


OS 


CD 




1-1 




i-H 


tH 


i—i 


r-l 


Tf 


M 


€©• 












«» 




CO 

U 










19 




'■a, 

■'3 
















5 


3 




: cr 








CO 








o 1 


_^ 3 




:ts 








13 


7 






4) 
O 


C (-1 










0) 


C 

u 

O 


a, 

"a 

■B 

Ph 

d g 




a 
u 


.9 5P c 




• en 

. a> 

.a 








T3 




a 


-3 J .£ 

P5 3ft 




•ceo j 


u 




CO 


> 

< 


SOPh * 


"2 
.2 

! 8, 

. o 


<4H ^ ■— 

& s 


c 

c 

> X 

) «: 

c 


-SHE 


"rt 

a 
2 
O 






<i 








m 


M cj 


C 


) 








COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 



47 



o 
o 

8 

in 

a 

w 
M 
W 
O 

< 

< 
O 
S5 

g 
H 

B S 

> < 

s § 

pq « 

SI 



Ph 



H 



u 





en 


00 


t-cooc 


) 00 


t- rH i-H C 


I— 


tr- 




lJ w 


■<* 


CM^f 


: c<» 


oq ^ » t^ a eo 


31 

o 


oo 


lOr-ir- 


1 o 


co eo co r-i r-i cm 






r-t 




co 


io 


69- 












«<» 


^ 


oo 


t-eooc 


) 00 


t- rH CO K5 rH CM 


W o 


"* 


CM.TJJt- 


CM 


00 'j] •* H W CM 


o o 

en 


00 


io'hV 


i © 


co eo o co •<* o> 






rH 




co 


t- 


se- 












60- 




00 


00 


b-eooc 


00 


C- r- 


eo cm r- 


a> 


03 

w 

O 

w 

o 

1-3 


•>* 


OJ-^t- 


CM 


cq ■«* 


lO t-; CO CM 


O 


CO 


lOHr 


o 


cb « 


rH CJ> r- 


o 






iH 




eo 


»o 


H 


ee- 












e& 






































O 


















O 


00 


00 


t-eooc 


oo 


t- r- 


oc 


rH b" 


-^ 


U 


"* 


CM "St- 


CM 


oq ■>* 


t- 


O. t- 


m 


co 


o 


oo 


ies' r-ir- 


o 


CD K 


cc 


CO CM 


t-^ 








rH 




o: 


eo 


\a 


$* 


VO 


&> 












ee- 


2 


































fc 




















iO 


00 


t-eocc 


oo 


t- r- 


w 


00 t- 


rH 


g 


-# 


CM -^tr- 


CM 


00. Tt 


Cr- 


y-t IC 


lO 


H 


o 

4-> 


oo 


io rH r- 


o 


cd ec 


CT 


00 r- 


oo 


i-l 






rH 




o. 


CM 


-* 


H 


l-l 


ee- 












60- 




oo 


t-eooc 


00 


t- r- 


r- 


cm a- 


t— 


"* 


CM. ■<* t- 


<M 


oq tj 


Tl 


co c 


7-t 


13 


00 


iOrHr- 


© 


«d ec 


r- 


rH 


o 






rH 




CN 


CM 


■>* 


«©• 












€«■ 










tn "rt 




. , 






CO 








•M 


*2 o 






.& 








<u 








a 


d nj 






"3 








CJ 








d 


If 






cr 
















S 






a 








C/3 








o 
1) 

CJ 


11 






d 








M 

U 

a 

a 


"rt 




a 


rt o +. 














.& 




d 


tn c 






in 






CO 

W 


'0 
d 

"G 




d 


T),g e 


A 




.4) 






PS 
W 
CO 


T3 

d 

> 

cJ 

M 
4-1 

in 
"3 


..PL, 

a a 

O <sS 
g OpH 


cr 

(L 
C, 

'> 

>- 

a 

1 

c 


"3 
d 

CIS 

d 

.o 


PQ Srg 

ill 


e 
c 
■E 

c. 

•t- 
c 

r- 


4> 3 - 

•Ceo «; 
w ^ 

BJ'S £ 
"in .2^ 
ii 3 1 


« 

"5 

TJ 






1 




>-c 
CO 

a. 
O 


OP 


Hh 


d 
a 

O 






M C< 




M Ci 




H IN 








< 








Ph 




L 






P 





4 8 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



1-1 
o 
o 


in 

fc 
o 

ui 

W 

w 
I— » 

H 
< 

W 

o 



> ^ 
<! > 



G pi 

B < 



o 



CO 


T-ICJ 


1—1 


O 



t-<MOO 

U3i-i i-H 



t-(MOO 
C\j t-; t-; 

lOHrH 



t-NOO 
Oq t-; C-; 

iri T-i T-i 



rt H 



.3 



gOf^ 



M O O 



Ph 



m 



to 


OOiH 


oo 
i— i 


00 
i— 1 





13 






a 




■a 






& 




O 






& 

-*-> 


c 

3 


03 






Pi 

a 

"a 


O « 






3 


>H T3 








O a 






H 


T3 O 
cl "- 1 






H3 

d 










tap tn 








d M 








"3.5 












a 


:3t3 




a> & 


3:3 




•c 3 


of B 
f Bu 
ment 




!3 M 




C3 "rf 


cop 


H 


- o 


ratio 

eep 

Eaui 




o 


S3 o 
-a S 


OP 


C 
H-l 








H CS 






u 







COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 49 

likewise a thoroughgoing Gary school, but has never 
had its full complement of pupils. An increased enroll- 
ment would undoubtedly require corresponding addi- 
tions to the teaching force, but would probably not 
cause a corresponding increase in plant operation ex- 
penditure. On the other hand, Jefferson, while crowded, 
is an old-fashioned building, slightly remodeled, and 
offers, in comparison with Emerson and Froebel, limited 
advantages. 

Accordingly, the cost at Jefferson, based on average 
daily attendance, runs very uniformly for the different 
grades — $31.67 for the kindergarten, $34.89 for grades 
1 to 5, and $33.97 for grades 6 to 8. It varies, in con- 
trast, at Froebel from $40.17 for the kindergarten to 
$48.51 for grades 1 to 5, $57.54 for grades 6 to 8, with an 
average of $79.22 for the different years of the high school. 
The differences at Emerson are even greater and the 
cost still higher: for the kindergarten, $46.83; grades 1 
to 5, $64.49; grades 6 to 8, $74.58; and $90.80 for the 
high school. In comparing cost at Emerson and Froebel 
with cost at Jefferson, and particularly in comparing grade 
cost at Emerson and Froebel with the cost of elementary 
instruction in other cities, it should be borne in mind 
that elementary pupils in Emerson and Froebel enjoy 
unusual opportunities in shops and in science, and that 
high school teachers instruct them both in science and in 
drawing. 



V. CURRENT COST OF THE SCHOOL 
SHOPS 

A FINANCIAL report of the Gary schools might 
well cover in detail each of the activities Gary 
emphasizes. For practical reasons we confine 
ourselves to a single special feature, the school shops. 

We include under shops not only forge, foundry, etc., 
but the manual training shops. The manual training 
shops are included because they also do productive work 
and the credits they receive for their products reduce 
the cost of operating them by 12 to 31 per cent. 

The Gary authorities distinguish between regular day 
and Saturday shops, dividing the operating expense five- 
sixths to the* day school and one-sixth to the Saturday 
school. In our discussion, we disregard this distinction 
and combine the cost, for there is only one set of shops and, 
as pointed out above, the expense would be practically 
the same whether they are open five or six days a week. 

Owing to the peculiar method of handling shop cost, 
it is especially important at the outset to fix in mind the 
initial or total amount spent on shops. This aggregated 
in 1915-1916, exclusive of supervision, $22,535.31, and 
was distributed as shown in Table XIX. 

This expenditure covers the wages of the manual 

so' 




w 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 



5 1 



X 







JO'-)COC<ll/5m.-<QTj'0)eMCO**0©(£> 



ncjco co^cot^ScoSSco 5 
■=j<ocg" cococ\j<ocoaic>c>a> 



O'-l-^t>C0CJ>C0C0f>(N"*9a)»-l 



!2Sq8288888838888 

oo o ■* <o cr> <o pj^i a> c- w s « o 25 co 



co © n co >^ t£> o -a; co a> ifl ■>* 55 © .-< © «5 



jtpTtStoco 

JOr-t^CCCO 
fHMHNH 



^"3- 



-si" 3 :- 

■a S-fl*3 S_8 P .yen u-fl 3 




V (Lj A [* A Ph w Cm Pk| PL, w Cli 



52 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

training teachers and of the shopmen, the outlay for all 
materials used in instruction and in productive work, as 
well as for supplies, upkeep of shops, and shop equipment. 

While Gary actually spent during 1915-1916 $22,535.31 
on regular day and Saturday shops, the final or net cost 
to be charged against instruction was much less. The 
shops, as stated before, do productive work for which they 
receive credit. 1 The credits, as computed by us, amounted 
in 1915-1916 to a total of $12,217.62. (Table XX.) 
The soundness of thus reducing instruction cost must 
now be discussed. 

The Gary authorities credit the shops to the extent 
of the estimated market value of their products; but, 
for reasons that will appear as we proceed, we credit 
them only with production cost. To illustrate: If 
lumber, hardware, etc., including operation supplies, 
to the amount of $15, and labor to the amount of $35 
go into the construction of a school desk, the production 
cost of the desk is $50, and we credit the shop with 
$50, regardless of whether the market value of the desk is 
$25, $75, or what not. However, the credits thus al- 
lowed include not only the productive work of the regu- 
lar day and Saturday schools, but also such products as 
the night schools turn out. 2 

In order to compute on the basis of production cost the 

1 The shoe shop and the pottery are the only shops that receive no 
such credit. 

2 The amount of productive work done in the night schools is small 
and so interwoven with the productive work of the regular day and 
Saturday schools that it was impossible to separate it and erect a separate 
account. 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 



53 



a 

a 

o 

u 

a 8 

« 5 
o < 

13 

W ft 



O 



•«3 



M 

gg°2 



S W 



w 3 



a o. 



rt >> 



U O 



£ 



LOCO LOCO 



CO 00 .-100 

o> cm *-<cm 
id in cood 



*o >> o 


00 
CO 


&St> 8 


in 


8 ftC a. 


a> 




w 

ee- 



co omoo cm 

O rHCOCO t> 

co oSog? to 

o t-55 in 

•* ^coco cm 



t^co 

00 <» 



rj n in 



OO500M in cot^-cn oil cm 



CO N tOt 











• a 

• o 

• B 


:"S ■§ 


".a 


roe- 

liool 
rson 


. O 
. O 










.ja_; m 




.ja 
















,\M . u V 








o . 
CO ._ 


"3 o 


• s 


,coog 


:fe 


: :co g 

: & :"3w 


.CO 

!"3 
















.ja 


a 
o 

.a 

CO 


"c3 
1 


.9 § Mu u a : o; : g g a : S .'co j g : g 

" «SScu o o K."r i mOsPokScogo 
a pia st •> sco Bco s vjaco^coj-ixi-w^or)^, 












On 


3 E?3 
o o« 


3 

s 


8 .3 S 

CO PhPh 


.S 




CM 


oooo co in 
inco^rineM 


CO 


t^aiai 


CM 


s as 








M 1 


OO^HOO 


CM 


Tl> 




I> 






CM CO CO 


g 


CM rHt^ 




o 
H 


CM 


NNt-Nt» 
CMC0>-lr-c* 


t> 


gsjs 


co Enin 


s 


CM 










•-I i-lr-l 






















09- 














"3 


in 

00 


CMQQt^t-l 
COlOOCMeM 


as 

00 


in©-* 

>-l->*© 


CM 
CM 


in co>-i 
cm i-itn 


s 


■g 


s 


COSTS' 00 ■* 
irfCNrlNt- 


CT) 

CO 

rH 


23E3 


CO 


cm ^-m 

O ■*(£) 




a 


u 














g 




oooopcD^! 

OOCM^CMO 


En 


gses 


8 


IB O-f 

in cmcm 


s 


J3 


N 


COCO-^COQ 

t-oiocno 

r-(CO>-l CM 


en 


CM COO 


r^ 


o r~cM 




m 


s 


3$9 


CO 


*l H.^ 


C£$ 




en 




rt 








fH iH 








•oja 

»"d 

is 



.2 3 

•OT3 



toCO 

o *• 

•B.g 

°T3 



a-a 






3 



54 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

credits to be granted the several shops, it became neces- 
sary for us to determine as exactly as possible two factors: 
(a) the time, and (b) the materials, distributed against 
production. Each of these factors calls for consideration. 

In a well-managed industrial concern, it is a simple 
matter to decide on the labor cost of production, but in 
the Gary school shops it was extremely difficult. In the 
first place, there are in the school shops, as a rule, two 
kinds of workers — the pupils and the instructors. The 
pupils may be busy on something for themselves, but 
more often they are working — especially the older ones — 
on building and equipment repairs, on additions to 
buildings, on new equipment, or on supplies. These 
older pupils fill out time slips in a formal manner, but 
their time, except when pupils are paid as helpers, 
is rarely distributed against construction work. In a 
word, their time is not considered and does not enter 
directly as a factor in reporting production cost. 

In the second place, the teacher may be busy with in- 
struction and shop routine; he may be engaged along with 
his pupils on constructive work; he may be engaged on a 
job independently, meanwhile supervising also the work 
of pupils; or he may be absent from the shop altogether, 
on a special assignment, such as repairing a roof, power 
plant, or the like. In whatever capacity he is engaged — 
and the records are not always clear — it is the time of 
the instructor only, not the time of pupils, except when 
they are paid as helpers, that is taken into account. 

The artisan-instructor first reports his time on a time 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 55 

slip, 1 which covers his entire period of duty. The time 
thus reported is distributed between non-productive 
and productive hours. But the productive hours as 
here given do not have the same meaning as productive 
time entered on similar slips in industry. In industry, 
productive time on time-slip reports indicates the actual 
time that the workman himself gave to the job. Pro- 
ductive time as recorded on the Gary time slips may 
mean one of several things — it is impossible to tell which. 
It may mean (a) the hours the instructor himself worked 
on the job; or (b) the instructor's estimate of the time he 
gave to supervision, instruction, and assistance while his 
pupils worked; or (c) the instructor's estimate of how long 
it would have taken him to do the task himself, regard- 
less of the attention he gave to supervision and instruction 
while his pupils were doing the work, and regardless of 
the time they actually gave to it. Obviously, when the 
record of productive time on the time slips is thus ambigu- 
ous, it is impossible to determine the amount of time the 
artisan-teachers themselves give to production. There- 
fore, if productive time at Gary as reported on time 
slips is construed as equivalent to productive time in in- 
dustry, such an interpretation involves the assumption 
that the time of the instructor devoted to supervision 
and instruction of children is offset by their labor. 

While the Gary authorities require their artisan- 
instructors to make the time report in question, they com- 
pute the labor cost of production on the basis of a second 
1 Manual training teachers do not make this time slip report. 



56 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



report in which productive hours of service are entered 
against specific jobs. But even the productive time of 
this second report 1 does not have the same meaning 
as productive time in industry. It may and does in- 
clude such items as "instruction," that is, attendance 
on teachers' conferences and the like. Moreover, the 
time so reported may be and often is an estimate made 
at the completion of the job, not a record, made step by 
step, as the work progresses. Hence, even the produc- 

TABLE XXI 

PRODUCTIVE TIME FROM TIME SLIPS AND PRODUCTIVE TIME 
FROM PRODUCTION REPORTS 

Regular Day and Saturday Schools Combined 





PRODUCTIVE TIME 


PRODUCTIVE TIME 




SHOPS 


FROM 


FROM 


DIFFERENCE 




TIME SLIPS f 


PRODUCTION REPORTS* 




Cabinet Shop 


$ 1,327.95 


$1,200.04 


$ 127.91 


Pattern Shop 


588.59 


549.57 


39.02 


Foundry 


867.92 


492.72 


375.20 




1,365.00 


988.79 


37621 


Machine Shop 


744.25 


420.85 


323.40 


Plumbing Shop 


1,661.69 


1,627.00 


34.69 


Sheet Metal 








Shop 


1,225.55 


1,130.55 


95.00 


Paint Shop . . . 


1,093.94 


1,037.20 


56.74 


Print Shop, 








Emerson.. . 


920.04 


752.24 


167.80 


Print Shop, 








Froebel 


648.73 


633.90 


14.83 


Total 


$10,443.66 


$8,832.86 


$1,610.80 



fThis tabulation does not include the non-productive time reported on time slips. 

•In this calculation the $739.91 of productive time credited to manual training teachers 
is not included because they are paid on a monthly basis and do not make .time-slip 
reports. 

1 This report is made also by manual training teachers. 




I 

Oh 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 57 

tive time recorded on the second report may have any- 
one or all of the meanings mentioned in connection with 
the productive time reported on the previous time slips. 

These two separate reports on productive time are not 
checked one with the other, and hence do not agree. 
When expressed in terms of money, there is a difference 
between them of $1,610.80 (Table XXI) — a difference 
which it was impossible for us to reconcile. 

Therefore, in attempting to determine the labor cost 
of production we were compelled to take the reports 
of productive time at their face value, treating the pro- 
ductive time so reported — which in most cases is an 
estimate of unknown meaning — just as if it had the same 
definiteness and significance as productive time in in- 
dustry. We were also compelled, inasmuch as we had 
no definite basis which would enable us to augment the 
time of the instructor in respect to particular jobs, to 
base our credit allowances on the productive time given 
in the second time report, which is less, as pointed out, 
by $1,610 than that given in the first or time-slip report. 
In consequence, the sum in question, representing the 
difference between the productive time of the two re- 
ports, became a charge against instruction. 

Similar difficulties were encountered in attempting to 
determine the cost of materials. Theoretically, all ma- 
terials and supplies are first assembled in a storeroom 
and afterwards distributed to the shops on requisition. 
In practice, while some materials go through the store- 
room, much goes directly to the shops; and in the case 



S 8 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

of special construction or repair jobs material may even 
be delivered directly to the building where the work is 
to be done. For example, paper and printing ink are 
stored on open shelves in the print shops; pig-iron, coke, 
and foundry supplies, in bins in the foundry; bar-iron and 
steel, on open racks in the forge shop; pipes and plumb- 
ing supplies, in the plumbing shop. When needed, these 
are used by the instructor of the shop in which they 
are stored, and by the instructors of other shops as well. 

Under these circumstances, there is no little oppor- 
tunity for error. An instructor who has used material 
may forget to make out a requisition; again, in estimat- 
ing the value of the material there may be inaccuracies 
in respect to quality, quantity, price, and extensions; 
with the result that correct charges may not be made or 
materials may be charged against the wrong job. In a 
word, the control over materials and supplies is not 
rigorous. This is evidenced by the reported deficits 
in the storeroom — $9,486 in 1913-1914, 1 and $5,240 in 
1914-1915 2 . Nor is the total value of the materials 
received checked against the value of the materials 
used and on hand. Thus, without proper inventories, 
invoices, and requisitions, it was impossible for us to do 
more than accept the values of the materials consumed in 
construction as reported by the shop instructors. 

The production credits as computed by us and given 
in Table XX are based, therefore, on productive time 

1 Financial Report of the Gary Public Schools, 1913-1914. 
1 Financial Report of the Gary Public Schools, 1914-1915. 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 59 

and purchase value of materials as entered by the shop 
instructors in their production reports. While these 
were generally accepted, no effort was spared to examine 
payrolls, invoices, requisitions, or whatever might throw 
light on the question at issue. While it is frankly ad- 
mitted that there may be errors in some of the details of 
these analyses, it is believed that they are as accurate as 
it is possible to make them from existing data. 

In determining the character of the credit — that is, 
whether it should be charged to operation, upkeep, or 
capital outlay — the Gary distribution was followed; 
the only departures arise from an occasional difference 
of judgment as to classification of items. 

With credits allowed and their distribution deter- 
mined, it is a short road to the final cost of the Gary 
school shops. Their final or net cost represents the dif- 
ference between the total initial expenditure, $22,535.31, 
and the production credits allowed, $12,217.62, a dif- 
ference of $10,317.69. Taken as a whole, the Gary 
school shops thus appear, without counting educational 
supervision, to be 54 per cent, self-supporting; that is, 
there is an abatement, by reason of productive work, of 
54 per cent, of the total initial cost. 

The final cost of the respective shops, when credit is 
given for only the labor and material value of these 
products, is as given in Table XXII. 

However, if credit is given on the basis of the estimated 
market value of their products, as fixed by the instructors, 
the final cost of the shops would be quite different. The 



6o 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 






H S 



osooifliflot^oogiQa)£-Qe9 

N-3'(Mt>a3!-l<NO'<tf , OO0005© 

^HC^t-'dt-'toirii-iooodtdoitdoQ 

rHr-1 COCOCMOtO^" tO OJ(N 



coiMioaiooi'fl''-(mt>(NO(ncooto 
NO>i-ioOi-<coco>-;iocoiotDU3(r)oc5 
co co co od rj o co t> to n r-' © £3 to c4 ■* 







J3 ft e «> 


CO 


s; ft 3 ft 


!> 


O 3 « 
«5 W 


& 



NNr-llNONQffHO 

coc^cor-cncoLnioco 
co'coc-qtocofficiogj 



O O ci 

O ft (U 

H 3 sg 



O u rt 



s SPHJS 



OLnrf CT>CO**a>©00t>f~tOtOg> tO 

■<* ti> to c-- (j> a> co t> to ■* o co t> © to 

S'NNOOQdt^t^COC^'-ItON^ oi 



C^NCS->*MC0C0OLt5Q00rl"a'00pO 

t^Mint>HOMHHOONnHc5q 
cq'dco^d^Mt>JtOrHf~^<55?P9y? 



in^^to^LnLft-Hocoto-^Ntooto 
^^©mcotdcoooLOQcooai-tfeNiTji 
■*t--oScocooBt-csicoLnooooNtDtDco 

t~-tflCOtOCMNOt~t^CMN>HtOlOtDCO 



& 
CO ._ 

CO oca<*> 
"3 OCO u u 

2w a 8,-S, 

-.2 SS'C^. 




;IIlg|ll.s = agS 

'la U 5 o52jStt£o 

OPntufe^PHCOMliftHCOfe 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 61 

shop instructors, in 1915-1916, placed a market value on 
their products of $16,268, which is alone 72 per cent, of the 
initial cost of all shops; but it should be noted that this 
amount (Table XX) does not include the market value 
of the products of the manual training shops or of the 
paint shop, as the records of these shops were incomplete. 

The market value estimates furnished by the instruc- 
tors are in many cases higher than the labor and material 
cost of the products; the difference represents the sup- 
posed work of the pupils over and above the productive 
time lost by the instructor in teaching and supervising 
them, or the supposed profit of a vendor, or both. 

Owing to the diversity of the products and the un- 
certainty with regard to the productive time and the 
materials charged against particular jobs, it was impos- 
sible to check these estimates from the reports themselves 
or from outside sources. But the question may fairly be 
raised as to whether Gary is not paying high for all its 
productive work, even when this is charged to the system 
at actual labor and material cost. Without doubt the 
market value estimates made by the instructors would 
in trade often be regarded as high. (Table XXIII.) 

Finally, crediting the shops for what they do at the 
actual labor and material cost of production amounts 
simply to charging other departments and divisions of 
the system for an expenditure actually made. But 
adding to the original expense an imaginary profit of 
25 to 150 per cent, is equivalent to charging other de- 
partments and divisions of the system with an expense 



62 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



Si 3 



OOQOOOMfflOO 

oioooioioi><ooo 

HH nNHOOUTfCO 
«9- 



OOOOOO^OJCClfl 

^<j>popoqc<i«qeooq 

HH NHH»(BHN 
60- 



wioo eoNtoo 

*r-ir-J '<DNo6 

iHCM 



OOOOOOOOCOU5 
©9- 



^ 



a 

a 

■8* 

.» h jh >- .s a 

bp'ea'd'aJ tn3 

O D< CU cves !? 

ci v V 4) n h 



"o 4> 

O ** 
<-> 3 

,M o o O 

Pico:: U 



. o 

o„n 

; o u m 

■••;:: a,-£S 2 S 

g^ : :&§^&:s 

03 CO O O M l«rH ■— < 43 *-• *H 




H 



« 



COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 63 

that was never incurred, and makes the reported expen- 
diture larger than the real expenditure. On the other 
hand, crediting the shops to the extent of this imaginary 
profit reduces their operation cost far below what the 
cost actually is. In a word, administrative policies 
and school accounting run into all kinds of inconsisten- 
cies when based on anything besides actual expenditures. 
Hence, we believe that we are justified in basing credits 
on actual labor and material cost, and reporting the 
Gary school shops as 54 per cent, self-supporting. 

It should, however, be remembered that this estimate 
is derived by taking all shops together, including even the 
shoe shop and the pottery, though they do no produc- 
tive work for which they receive credit. On the other 
hand, while the manual training shops do receive credit 
for their products, they are not operated primarily on 
a production basis, as are the following shops: 



1 Cabinet shop 


(Froebel) 


Plumbing shop 


(Froebel) 


Pattern shop 


(Emerson) 


Sheet metal shop 


(Froebel) 


Foundry 


(Emerson) 


Paint shop 


(Froebel) 


Forge 


(Emerson) 


Print shop 


(Emerson) 


Machine shop 


(Emerson) 


Print shop 


(Froebel) 



If, therefore, these essentially productive shops are con- 
sidered by themselves, and credited on the basis of the 
labor and material cost of their products, they are 69 
per cent, self-supporting; that is, there is an abatement, 
by reason of productive work, of 69 per cent, of their 
total initial cost. (Tables XIX and XXII.) 

1 After April, 19 16, the cabinet shop was operated as a manual train- 
ing shop. 



VI. CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR GROUNDS, BUILD- 
INGS, AND EQUIPMENT 

WE HAVE been engaged up to this point in see- 
ing what it cost to operate the Gary schools 
in a given year. The Gary plan requires more 
extensive school grounds, a new type of school building, 
and more abundant equipment than the old-type edu- 
cation. Now, what capital outlay has been involved in 
thus instituting these schools? 

Gary's capital investment in grounds, buildings, and 
equipment at the end of the school year 1915-1916 
aggregated $1,016,319 (Table XXIV), equal to a capital 
outlay of $246* per pupil in average daily attendance. 
But this city-wide average, although suggestive, sheds 
little light on the per capita outlay which a thorough- 
going Gary system would require; for the widest dis- 
parity exists in building facilities, as is clearly revealed 
in the differences in per pupil plant investment, ranging, 
as it does, from $38 in the poorest schools to $524 at 
Emerson. 

Nor does the per capita investment of $135 at Jeffer- 

1 We are aware that per pupil capital outlay should be expressed in 
terms of pupil building capacity. But, as will be pointed out, the dem- 
onstrated pupil capacity of at least the larger Gary buildings is not known, 
and for this reason we fall back on average daily attendance. 

64 



GROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT 65 





CO i-H COrJ< OS 


OS-"* 


PER PUJ 

AVERAGE 
ATTEND 


COHTfO'* 


lOt- 


•«i<oo woo 


tot- 


N 00 co tj< 






r-l 




CO t- «i OS O U3 t^ 
t> O W O) 05 o «o 
O jg t> oi -^ -^J 10 

■^OOHOHOIO) 

co"oo~eo~oo~c\fco~o 

00 CO CT5 N tH co 

co-* 



00 
to o 
to o^ 

U3~© 



OOOfN^OS 

-* t- co i— 1 10 

t#00«D«O(M 



10 01 

OO) 

0000 

"'tf.OO^ 



ococoot- 

oooooud 

©O^N^CO^ 

T-T©«o~fc-~co~ 

<MC0 



co 00 
©I> 

to© 

U3(M 



WIOtKHIO^HO 
Tft>NOOU3HO 

odi-ixoo6">#c<i©©' 

OSt-OOOOitfiTjt© 

qweqawa <m o 
©"t-~cxnoeo" , oo"c\f©~ 

«Dt-H i-( i-H 



©13 



o to Jt^a S3— C 

h 3 <U O ~5 a c« 



«8 

•9.9 

rt-g 
3 3^ 

in C O 

hi 

S.s <« 

"a 

o rt oj 
&*>•* 

&o« 

$*$ 

2 p 5 
J.SO 

£~S 

1*1 

w a a 

-< S 

5) o a) 

«^£ 
SB'S 

s«* 

W a* 
m m u 



<2§ 

•2 m 



66 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

son, or $288 at Froebel, or of $524 at Emerson supply a 
reliable basis for judgment as to what the necessary out- 
lay would be. As pointed out above, Jefferson is an 
old-style, remodeled building, affording simply conven- 
tional facilities. Emerson and Froebel meet the re- 
quirements of a Gary school, but, as stated before, neither 
of these buildings has ever been used to capacity on the 
Gary plan. Consequently, on the basis of present use, 
the per capita investment as shown for Jefferson is prob- 
ably lower, and that for Emerson and Froebel is consider- 
ably/ higher, especially that for Emerson, than would 
be required by a thoroughgoing Gary system. 

In the absence of positive data on the capital outlay 
required by a Gary school, we must at present content 
ourselves with an estimate. Obviously, the estimate 
will vary with the amount and price of land provided 
for outside activities, as also with the type and character 
of the proposed building. Even a more important factor 
is the pupil capacity of the plant on the Gary plan. 
This will vary according to the proposed length of the 
school day, the proposed size of classes in the old-line 
studies, the time division between the "fundamentals" 
and the "special branches," the amount and extent of 
departmentalization, the number of children placed at 
one time in auditorium, music rooms, laboratories, 
shops, and the like, and according to the indoor provi- 
sions for the accommodation of children in bad weather, 
when outside facilities cannot be used. 

With these different factors affecting the estimate, 



GROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT 67 



r ^ CO 

w w 

PQ o 

s s 

o 

M 

51 
u 




68 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

there is no likelihood at present of agreement on the 
pupil capacity of a building operated on the Gary plan, 
and positive knowledge must await experimentation and 
experience with a definite program. 

In the meantime, an idea of the required per pupil 
capital outlay may be obtained from an estimate based 
on the present capital investment in the two largest 
Gary plants, and on the superintendent's judgment of 
their respective capacities. On this basis, assuming 
that the present equipment is adequate for the maximum 
estimated enrollment, the per pupil capital outlay at 
Emerson would be $169, and at Froebel, $188. (Table 
XXV.) Of course Emerson and Froebel could not be 
duplicated to-day at anything like their original cost, 
and, as stated before, the pupil capacity will differ with 
the requirements of the program followed. 1 

J For an analysis of the superintendent's estimate, see report on 
Organization and Administration. 



VII. FIXED CHARGES 

IN ADDITION to the current expense of operating a 
school system and to the capital invested in grounds, 
buildings, and equipment, there is a type of school 
expenditure which we have not included as part of cur- 
rent cost, nor as part of capital outlay, though it is 
unquestionably part of the current school burden upon 
the community. All such expenditures are grouped 
under Fixed Charges and ordinarily embrace rent, in- 
surance, pensions, taxes for local improvements, and 
interest on funded and floating debt. 

Gary does not maintain a local teachers' pension 
fund, and rentals for school purposes have been negli- 
gible, amounting in 1915-1916 to only $30 for a storage 
coal yard. The usual building, security and liability 
insurance is carried, the premiums for 1915-1916 being 
$619.59. But the interest charges appear always to 
have been heavy. In 1915-1916 alone, they amounted 
to $33,248.85, equal to 8.6 per cent, of the total revenues 
for the year. (Table XXVI, and Schedule H-i of the 
Appendix.) 

It is not difficult to understand this fact. The Gary 
authorities had the task of creating an entire school 
system in a brief period. Bonds have been issued for 

69 



7o 



THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 



> 2 



M 
ON 
H 

\o 
o 



H 



n pq 
w 

(4 

w 

H 



doNt^idododdooo 



pq 

05 D 

W *_ cl 

w o 5 



o 5 

P5 






t-oo 

rHCO 



«ot>io<jieoc<ii-icoi-ica 

H^TfoecoiOesoa 






O^^l-HOO 1-1 \Q fc-^ 

i-Tcf©-«*coo'ar c<1 ~ 

hhhnSn 



«Ot-00«OHNnrillO 
OOOOHrtrtHHH 



FIXED CHARGES 71 

buildings, but the half million 1 secured in this way was 
not adequate to erect enough buildings of the proposed 
type to keep pace with the school population. 

To carry out the proposed building program, large 
sums, as we shall see in the next section, have been 
taken from current taxes for permanent improvements. 
Indeed, this has been done to such an extent that the 
funds for ordinary current expenses have been continu- 
ously depleted, with the result that it has been necessary, 
in order to keep the schools going, either to raise large 
amounts on temporary loans, or to defer the payment 
of school warrants. For example, at one time in 1914 
there were outstanding unpaid warrants to the amount 
of $100,000. Whether the money was obtained on short- 
term notes, or whether the payment of school warrants 
was deferred, interest had to be paid. The heavy inter- 
est burden of the Gary schools is thus due to the size of 
the floating debt as well as to the bond issues. 

1 See Table XXVII and Table G of the Appendix. 



VIII. FINANCING THE SYSTEM 

GARY'S total school expenditure up to the end of 
1915-1916 amounted to two and a half million 
dollars. It remains to inquire how this sum was 
raised. 

As elsewhere, school funds are derived chiefly from 
three sources, viz., the state apportionment, 1 local taxa- 
tion, and bond issues. Between 1906 and 1916 the 
state paid over to the Gary board of education 
$356,016.63 ; direct local taxation provided $1,614,284.74; 
and bonds account for $509,728.07. (Table XXVII.) 
Hence, for the period, 14.4 per cent, of the board's entire 
income came from the state, 65.1 per cent, from direct 
local taxation, and 20.5 per cent, from bonds. Sixty- 
five per cent, is not only a good proportion to raise 
locally, but the actual amounts produced — $15,725.97 
in the first year of her corporate existence and $323,786.70 
in 1915-1916 — are large. 

Gary has been able to raise large amounts for public 
education, in the first place because she has always com- 
manded relatively large resources. Millions were in- 
vested in the industrial plants giving birth to the city, 

1 The state holds'in trust certain vested funds and levies a state-wide 
school tax; the income from the former and the proceeds from the latter 
are apportioned annually to the separate school districts. 

72 




H 



FINANCING THE SYSTEM 



73 



Q 
P 

Hi 

o 
o 

K 

H g 

< 
o 

& 
o 

C/3 





th T-joqp 
oi odco«r> 

tOlMIMCO 



C(OH 



HOMN 

osqccH 

t-i-itd od 

ooco t- <Ni 

CO^C^r-^p 

oTcTo'io' 

COtOiDIM 



OW«5 
pr-HlO 

ciioo 

OtOH 
ONO 



II 



oooo-rfcDi— loooac 



lot-oo-^oqcooo-^covs 

MOfCOOUlO^tCOOO 

t-^tq^oo^pfc-^peo.peq,^ 
to~to~to~c>f -*i<"oo~ of co~taco~ 

t— icoooi-nu3t-05-^<<x>oa 

i-l i-H iH l-H C<1 O] CO 



* 9 

2 g g w 

° W § < 

oi u E H 

w a 




NN<OC0HqO«q'>*05 

od«o-<*05U3co'T-iedt^Tii 

tH tH i-H W tH tH t-H 



OUDSOO^iaoOiOO--* 

ppirt-^T-jT-Hpoacqp 
«oeo^ododooot>^'r-i 

T-l t- ^i< lO tO T)< 7— i co ai oo 

■^«,oq,«D c-^co N 'i-^CT^in i oq_"<* s 



0)0 

co oo 



i-Hcnco 
oo, tap 

ooc-j 

p-r-j^CO 

ta ofco 
co t- us 



HTfOOO 

oo, t-j ta, tjj co 
•<*" od r-i id od 
t-^<M ta^co <M^ 

oo'cvf-^CTrt-" 

Tj< tO «5-*J(C0 

cooacoco-* 



• ■ ■ © rH CS1 CO "*f» tQ «S> 

t-OOOlHHHHHHH 

«at>-o6oiOTHCNieo-<*td 

OOOOi— ItHtHt— IHH 

Cj OS O Oi Oi OS OS os os os 



Ob, H 



Ill 

Is 5 



3"« 

■5 x 

W g H 
- E «• 



74 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

before there were any schools. When the schools were 
organized, this wealth lay at hand ready to be taxed 
for their support. Meanwhile, the wealth of the city 
has increased rapidly, additional millions going into 
industry and still further millions into the upbuilding 
of the city itself, with the result that Gary has probably 
had from the beginning greater resources back of each 
child to educate than the majority of cities of similar 
size and character. 1 For example, in the school year 
1908-1909, the taxable property back of each child in 
average daily attendance amounted to $7,984. Attend- 
ance has increased more rapidly than taxable wealth, 
but even so there was in 1915-1916 $5,387 of taxables 
for each child in daily attendance. (Table XXVIII.) 
Among Gary's nearest neighbors approaching compara- 
ble size, Hammond had, in 1914-1915, $3,053 for each 
child in attendance, and East Chicago, $3,033. 

In the second place, Gary has contributed freely in 
support of public education, the local tax levy often 
reaching well up toward the limit permitted by law. 
(Table XXLX.) The very first year of the system, 1906, 
saw the lowest levy, 80 cents on each $100, whereas for 
the last three years the rate has remained uniformly 

1 When the assessed property values for 1 913 in seventy-four cities 
with a population of 30,000 and less than 50,000 reported in Financial 
Statistics for Cities, 1913, are placed against the average daily attendance 
for 1914-1915 as given in the Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Educa- 
tion for 1915-1916, the median wealth back of each child is $4,901, as 
compared with $5,252 at Gary. Undoubtedly, the greatest differences 
prevail in methods of assessment and in reporting attendance. These 
are, however, the best and only data available to show Gary's relative 
financial strength. 



FINANCING THE SYSTEM 



75 



Q 

■J 

n 
u 

B 

< 
w 

o 



> « 

Hi 



a 



w 
p 

1-1 

>< 
H 
ft 

W 

Q 
W 





fa 






5* 


rHT*CNlOO0T-(©eNb- 




■^oocot-oooeousoo 




5 a 


<x> o^o^o^o^o^o^eq^ 




■5 3 
Ph 


ot^ > t-"^«o'«o , io»o'»o' 


1 


«9- 


3 








.as 




< 


P c 
3-S 


0Cirl<t-<CcMU3eOt-<M 


r* 


t-»-iu3coeMi-ijgooco 


►J 


CM t- 05 O^O^i-J^..© H 


< 
Q 

W 
O 

2 


S< 


t-TcnT co~co ■^T><!jr 






> 




O *-< <M CO "* U3 «0 


< 




00 05i— iH^Hi- IHH 




rt 


t^o6o5©i-nc<ieO"<*io 




£ 


OOOiHHHHH 




OJ0505050505050505 






t-HtHt— |iH,-Ht-Ii-1i— It— 1 




ja2 


CM«Di-iTfOi-ioOi-ieo 




lOCOONCOCOt-tOO 




aa 


oq^T-^oq^Mt-^o^oq^T-^u^ 


o 


gu 


co~^eo~co~«Tco~c<foo'co' s 


£ 


6(9- 




o 






oJ> 




o 


"£>.« 


00CDCOTHt-i-IU3Tj<Ub 


Pi 


° 


hJ 


u tn 


rJUDWOOH'JOO 






o 


•a cs 


HHNTjHO(Dt-t-W 


o 


ra « 




m 
o 


J3>H 

O 






M 


t-0005©T-lcNJCO-*i«iO«0 






OOOHHHHHHH 




£ 


05050505050505050505 


G 


§ 


lQujotoioioomiooo 

OOHtOtDlOCSlOCDTtilO 


tf 


1 


o^o^eo^^^^cq^CN^eNi^ oo 


W 


■^oaiyHt^'cSoocoairHoo 


P< 


T3 


oo->*cocoTj<ir5t£>u3T-io 


Si 


Si 


05^t~ OS^CO^O^O^C^CNI CO 


t> 


oi"u3cxroTco"'otrcrT-rcsrod'cxr 


w H 


3 


rtHNNCNWN 


O < 


< 


CO- 


« > 




en 






Cfl 










i/i 






CO 

< 


l-l 

s 


S£Sr922?oi-i-cNico-<*iotx> 




OOOOriHriHHHH 




£ 


050505050505050505050) 




76 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

at $i .25. 1 The present levy for current operation, which 
includes the supplementary tuition tax and special taxes, 
is alone $1.15. There are two points in this connection 
worthy of comment. The supplementary tuition tax, 
which must be used for teachers' salaries, is kept uni- 
formly below the maximum, whereas special taxes, more 
or less flexible in that they are at times used for purposes 
other than those for which they are levied, approximate 
the maximum. 

Gary has also bonded herself to the legal limit — 2 per 
cent, of all taxable property. Besides issuing bonds 
aggregating $506,500, Gary inherited through annexa- 
tion a bond debt of $12,804.60, all but $1,000 of which 
has been extinguished, leaving bonds outstanding on 
July 31, 1916, of $507,500. (Table G of the Appendix.) 

In addition to these bonds, there were other liabilities 
on July 31, 1916, amounting to $122,030.43, or total 
liabilities of $629,530.43. As an offset there were, be- 
sides the $1,016,319.81 in grounds, buildings, and equip- 
ment, other assets aggregating $21,181.50, or total as- 
sets of $1,037,501.31. Hence, the difference between the 
total assets and the total liabilities, $407,970.88, repre- 
sents the Gary equity in school property. (Table B 
of Appendix.) 

The financial history of the Gary schools to date may 
therefore be summarized as follows: The state has con- 



1 A high tax rate usually accompanies a low assessed property value 
and vice versa; property at Gary, as previously stated, is assessed at 
about one-sixth of its cash value. 



B 



1-1 



W 
ffl 



fa 

o 

o 
o 



w 
o 



o 

Ox 

M 
CO 

w 

£ 

w 
►J 



o 
o 

I-} 



FINANCING THE SYSTEM 



oaumaad 

HfllOXVH 



n_ 



* • • 

WONNOOONNN 
^ i-l iH i-H i-H FHlH i-H ,-h i-l 



Da 



iS a 



poniuuaj 
tunuhxBjij 



oououuuoou 

inLominLnoooooooooo 

WINCgCMINiHi-lrHrtrH 



XA31 



ouooejocjo 

winmuiinooo 



8.2 



pa«tuua,j 



iCAS-J 



JO o o o o o u 

JOOOOOOO 



oyoouyoo 

oooooiniom 



^3 K 


§«H 




"9 S.2 


T)W^ 


< CO 



pajiraua,! 
uinuiix'Bj^ 



AWJ 



iiStniK 





a _ 










a 


Sh 


w 


60 



psunnisj 
umunxup^ 



yyyyyyuy 



itA37 



p3?;raua,j 
umuiprej^ 



iCA8^ 




^cfioSSfio^OiOiOidoi 

?-tiHi-Hi-(i-<*Hi-|iHi— li-l . 



77 



78 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

tributed a total of $356,016. Gary has provided from 
local taxes the remainder of the funds required for their 
current operation expenses, also for fixed charges, and 
has raised, besides, the equivalent of 39 per cent, of the 
present investment in grounds, buildings, equipment, 
and other property, which leaves the schools in debt for 
61 per cent, of their present assets. 

So much for the financial past. What now of the 
financial future? The amount of money Gary can raise 
for public education is limited by state law. Operating 
under this law, Gary has at no time up to the present 
been financially able to provide for all the children of the 
city educational opportunities and facilities such as Emer- 
son and Froebel afford. This, however, is no reason why 
in the initiation of the proposed system such schools as 
Emerson and Froebel should not have been built. But 
it goes without saying that the present inequalities in 
educational opportunities, except in so far as they arise 
from the scattered character of the school population, 
cannot continue indefinitely. In a word, the problem 
of financing a system of schools such as Gary proposes 
to establish must sooner or later be faced squarely. 

When account is taken of the recent origin, extent, 
and rapid growth of the city, it is not at all surprising 
that Gary up to now has not been able to provide equal 
facilities in all her schools. But will the city be able 
to do this within, say, the next ten years? The ques- 
tion, of course, can only be answered on the basis of a 
number of accepted assumptions, such as the following: 



FINANCING THE SYSTEM 79 

(a) That the annual increases in school enrollment 
for the next ten years — that is, between 1916 and 1926 — 
be the same as the average annual increase between 
1911 and 1916; 

(b) That the annual increases in the assessed value of 
property for the decade 1915-1925 be the same as the 
average annual increase between 191 1 and 1915; 1 

(c) That bonds be issued to the maximum amount? 
2 per cent, of the taxable wealth, and that the local 
school tax be kept continuously at the maximum, $1.55 
on each $100 of the tax duplicates; 

(d) That the present apportionment of state school 
funds and the present state laws controlling local school 
taxes and bond issues for school purposes remain un- 
changed; 

(e) That the present official estimate of the per pupil 
capacity of buildings like Emerson and Froebel (2,300) 
be made the basis in computing future building needs; 

(f) That the present cost per pupil in average daily 
attendance at Froebel be taken as the basis of computing 
future administration, operation, and instruction ex- 
pense; and, finally, 



1 The dates for the enrollment and the increase therein are one year 
later than the dates for the assessed value of property and the increase 
in such wealth, as the taxes for the support of the schools for any given 
year are levied on the assessed value of property as of the preceding 
year; also, a four-year period instead of a five is taken in estimating the 
annual increase in taxables, because the basis of assessment changes 
at the end of each fourth year, and the five-year period preceding 1015 
covers two such changes, whereas only two will occur in the succeeding 
ten years. Hence, to base the estimated increase on a five-year period 
would augment unduly the estimate. 



80 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

(g) That the present ratio between the current ex- 
penditures for administrative and general services and 
the day school combined, and for all other activities, 
such as night schools and the like, remain the same — 
80 per cent, and 20 per cent, respectively. 

Proceeding on these assumptions, we shall first con- 
sider building needs and the possibility of financing 
them. The new buildings required by 1926 will de- 
pend on the school enrollment at that time, which we 
estimate at 11,878. This number is arrived at in this 
way: During the five years 1911-1916 the school en- 
rollment increased 3,112. At the same average annual 
increase, the increase for the ten-year period 1916-1926 
would be double, or 6,224. Adding this estimated increase 
to the actual enrollment for 1915-1916 (5,654) we obtain 
a probable enrollment for 1926 of 11,878. 

To accommodate this number of pupils at least three 
new buildings of the Emerson and Froebel type must be 
provided, even if Glen Park and Jefferson continue to 
be operated, for experience has demonstrated that school 
buildings cannot be used in a changing and rapidly 
growing city at their maximum capacity. 1 To provide 
three new buildings of the kind contemplated will call, 
on the basis of the cost of the Froebel plant ($433,517.55), 
for a capital outlay by 1926 of not less than $1,300,552.65. 

The natural source of income for new grounds and 
buildings is bonds issued against the taxable wealth of 

1 It is interesting to note that to meet present needs and the needs of 
the immediate future, plans are now under way for two new buildings. 



FINANCING THE SYSTEM 81 

the community. The taxable wealth of Gary by 1925 
should approximate $51,383,403, for, as taxables increased 
during the four years 1911-1915 $9,268,785, the increase 
for the ten years 191 5-1925 would at the same average 
annual increase be $23,171,963. This sum plus the actual 
duplicate of 191 5 ($28,211,440) gives assessed property 
by 1925 to the amount of $51,383,403. 

Against this sum bonds may be issued up to 2 per 
cent. Gary may therefore raise for new buildings from 
bonds a total of $1,027,668.06 — $272,884.59 less than 
will be required. Moreover, it is to be remembered 
that there were on July 31, 191 6, bonds outstanding 
against taxables to the amount of $507,500. Unless 
these are taken up in the meantime — and for the sake of 
simplicity we assume they are not — new bonds can be 
issued only to the extent of $520,168.06, which leaves 
$780,384.59 to be raised from other sources if the new 
permanent equipment required by 1926 is to be provided. 

The only remaining source of income for grounds and 
buildings is local taxation. Whether any such amount 
can be provided from local taxation depends on the 
margin of income remaining after the current operation 
expense and the fixed charges of the system are provided 
out of funds received from the state and raised locally. 
We estimate 1 that such margin of current income over 
current expenses will aggregate by 1926 $1,749,824.11. 
(Table XXX— Appendix). 

In addition to the funds that may be raised by bonds, 

1 For the assumptions on which this estimate is based, see pp. 79-80. 



82 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

only $780,384.59 is required, as pointed out, to complete 
the building program we have in mind. Hence, not 
only this sum can be provided out of the possible margin 
of income over current expenses, but there will remain a 
surplus of $969,439.52, which is almost enough to liqui- 
date the bonds now outstanding to the amount of 
$507,500 and also the bonds aggregating $520,168.06 
to be issued to provide by 1926 the required new build- 
ings. In a word, on the bases of the foregoing assump- 
tions, Gary can not only finance within the period in 
question the proposed school system, but will at the 
end of the period be practically free of debt for grounds, 
buildings, and permanent equipment — this, moreover, 
on the basis of a local school tax rate not appreciably 
higher, when differences in methods of assessment are 
taken into account and both operation expense and 
capital outlay are considered, than the prevailing rate 
in our larger cities. 

Admittedly, material change in any one of a half dozen 
factors — a more rapid increase in enrollment than is 
provided for, the possible need of an additional plant 
owing to the development of widely separated sections, 
a less rapid and less uniform growth in taxable wealth, 
higher current operation cost, local opposition to liberal 
school taxes, and so on — may upset these calculations. 
Nevertheless, when the future is projected on the basis 
of known facts, it is clearly evident that Gary is not 
launched upon a financially impossible educational en- 
terprise. 



APPENDIX 



CONTENTS 

TABLE 

A Expenditures and Revenues in Summary — 

From August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 
B Balance Sheet as of July 31, 191 6 

C Operation Statement from August 1, 1915, to 

July 31, 1916 
D Revenue Statement from August 1 , 1 91 5, to July 

31, 1916 
E Fund Statement from August 1, 191 5, to 

July 31, 1916 
F Inventory as of July 31, 191 6 

G Statement of Outstanding Bonds as of July 31, 

1916 
H Expenditures by Organizations in Summary 

from August 1, 1915, to July 31, 1916 

SCHEDULE 

H-i Expenditures: Administrative and General Ser- 
vices 
H-2 Expenditures: Day Schools 
H-2-a Expenditures: Emerson Day School 
H-2-b Expenditures: Froebel Day School 
H-2-c Expenditures: Jefferson Day School 
H-2-d Expenditures: Other Day Schools 

8s 



86 CONTENTS 

SCHEDULE 

H-3 Expenditures: Saturday Schools 

H-3-a Expenditures: Emerson Saturday School 

H-3-b Expenditures: Froebel Saturday School 

H-3-c Expenditures: Jefferson Saturday School 

H-3-d Expenditures: Other Saturday Schools 

H-4 Expenditures: Night Schools 

H-4-a Expenditures: Emerson Night School 

H-4-b Expenditures: Froebel Night School 

H-4-C Expenditures: Jefferson Night School 

H-4-d Expenditures: Other Night Schools 

H-5 Expenditures: Summer Schools 

H-5-a Expenditures: Emerson Summer School 

H-5-b Expenditures: Froebel Summer School 

H-5-c Expenditures: Jefferson Summer School 

H-5-d Expenditures: Other Summer Schools 

H-6 Expenditures: Sunday Schools 

H-7 Capital Outlay and Debt Payment 

Table XXX Estimated Margin of Income Free for 
Permanent Improvements 



THE PUBLICATIONS OF THE 
GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 

REPORTS: 

THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD: AN ACCOUNT OF ITS ACTIV- 
ITIES, I902- 1914. 254 PAGES. 

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
1914-1915. 82 PAGES. 

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
I9I5-I916. 86 PAGES. 

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
I916-I917. 87 PAGES. 

STUDIES: 

PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MARYLAND, BY ABRAHAM FLEXNER AND 
FRANK P. BACHMAN. 2ND EDITION. 176 PAGES, WITH APPEN- 
DIX. 
THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, BY THOMAS H. BRIGGS.* 
COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY FINANCE, BY TREVOR ARNETT.* 

OCCASIONAL PAPERS: 

1. THE COUNTRY SCHOOL OF TO-MORROW, BY FREDERICK T. 

GATES. 15 PAGES. 

2. CHANGES NEEDED IN AMERICAN SECONDARY EDUCATION, 

BY CHARLES W. ELIOT. 29 PAGES. 

3. A MODERN SCHOOL, BY ABRAHAM FLEXNER. 23 PAGES. 

4. THE FUNCTION AND NEEDS OF SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION IN 

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES, BY EDWIN A. ALDERMAN. 
31 PAGES, WITH APPENDIX. 

5. LATIN AND THE A. B. DEGREE, BY CHARLES W. ELIOT. 

21 PAGES, WITH APPENDIX. 

6. THE WORTH OF ANCIENT LITERATURE TO THE MODERN 

WORLD, BY VISCOUNT BRYCE. 20 PAGES. 

* In Preparation. 



The REPORTS issued by the Board are official accounts of its ac- 
tivities and expenditures. The STUDIES represent work in the field 
of educational investigation and research which the Board has made 
possible by appropriations defraying all or part of the expense involved. 
The OCCASIONAL PAPERS are essays on matters of current edu- 
cational discussion, presenting topics of immediate interest from vari- 
ous points of view. In issuing the STUDIES and OCCASIONAL 
PAPERS, the Board acts simply as publisher, assuming no responsibil- 
ity for the opinions of the authors. 

The publications of the Board may be obtained on request 



TABLE A 

Expenditures and Revenues in Summary — From Augu; 
Analysis by Objects of Expenditure, Funds, and Char 



EXPENDITURES 



Objects of Expenditure 



Total. 



Personal Services 

Services Other than Personal > . . . 

Supplies and Materials 

Equipment 

Land and Improvements to Land. 

Buildings 

Rent, Insurance, Taxes, Interest . . 

Pensions 

Payment of Debt 3 



Revenues and Unfunded Expenditures., 



Revenues. 



$335,962.81 



205,584.14 
4,725.95 
29,334.96 
12,725.50 
1,510.54 
18,824.42 
33,898.44 
Note 2 
29,358.86 



335,962.81 



274,375.06 



Current Expense 



Other than 
Upkeep and 
Depreciation 



$239,645.05 



205,584.14 

4,725.95 

29,334.96 



239,645.05 



184,878.75 



Upkeep of 
Property 



$15,793.36 



3,551.36 

498.20 

11,743.80 



15,793.36 



14,957.39 



No 



Funds Raised by Taxation and from Mis- 
cellaneous Sources 

Loan Funds (Bond Proceeds) 



223,364.50 
51,010.56 



180,908.47 
3,970.28 



1,627.00 
13,330.39 



Unfunded Expenditures 61,587.75 



54,766.30 



835.97 



* Services of a contractual nature, such as railroad and vehicular transportation, telegraph and telephone servi 
1 No pension system or teachers' pension fund is maintained. 

1 Includes deficiencies of previous school years. 

* No property records are available upon which to determine the obsolescence of the school property. This 



Assets 



Cash — In Banks 

Cashier's Fund. 



Delinquent Taxes Receivable 

Estimated 

Less Reserve for Estimated 
Uncollectible 



10,728.92 
500.00 



3,000.00 
500.00 



Land, Buildings, and Equipment 

Land and Improvements to 

Land 208,466.91 

Buildings 698,733.33 

Equipment 120,079.64 



1,027,279.88 
10,960.07 



Less Farm Loss . 



Stores (Estimated) 

Work in Progress (Estimated) . . 
Insurance (Unearned Premium) . 



TABLE B 

Balance Sheet 
(as of July 31, igi6) 



$ 11,228.92 



2,500.00 



1,016,319.81 

5,000.00 

500.00 

1,952.58 



Total .-. $1,037,501.31 



Liabilities 



Invoices and Payrolls Payable 

Warrants Payable 

Contracts Payable 1 \\ 

Bonds Payable 

Fund Reserves (19V6-17 Funds coUectedin 1915-16)' 
Special School Tuition Fund ... . $35,588.50 
Bond^ Principal and Interest 

4,642.21 



Fund. 



Reserves for Property Depreciation. 

Land and Buildings 00,000 00 

Equipment 0.00f) on 



00,000.00 



Surplus 

Assets over Liabilities. 



Total. 



10,699.31 

21,386.65 

49,713.76 

507,500.00 



40,230.71 

00,000.00 
407,970.88 

$1,037,501.31 



1 Jefferson School building and grounds are being taken over bv the Schonl r,t-u f-™ n,. n t j ^ 
rental of $9,000.00, which by io» will give the School City a title to the property ^ * n a ° d Com P an y ° n a «ntal basis, i. e., the School City 



paying an annual 



TABLE C 

Operation Statement 
For August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 



Expenditures 



Current Expenses $255,438.41 

Other than Upkeep and Depre- 
ciation . . $239,645.05 

Upkeep of Property 15,793.36 

Depreciation of Property 00,000.00 



Fixed Charges 

Capital Outlays and Debt Payments . 

Capital Outlays 

Debt Payments 



17,267.10 
29,358.86 



33,898.44 
46,625.96 



Total $335,962.81 



Revenues 



Revenues Applicable to School Year 

IOI 5-* 6 •■■••■ $437,278.30 

Revenues from State $ 62,481 04 

Local Taxes 317,594.52 

Miscellaneous Revenues 6,192.18 

Bond Issues (proceeds) 51,010.56 

Less Amount Used in School Year 
1914-15 



Balance Available for School Year 
1915-16 

Deficit ...!!!!!!! 

Borrowed from 1916-17 Funds. . 

1915-16 Warrants Unpaid 

Unpaid Invoices 



29,501.79 
21,386.65 
10,699.31 



162,903.24 



274,375.06 
61,587.75 



Total $335,962.81 



-J* 



i«oS 



<3& 



lU ^S 



c&\ 



■!&* 



a*** 



,\-\ 



00^ 



Common 
Reveni 
Con 
Con 
Liqv 
Dog 

Local ' 
Tax 

Miscel 
Pup 
Dep 

Special Z 
Local 
Tax 
Miscel 
To? 
Sale 
Sho 
Mis 

Compuls 

Local 

Taj 

Vocation 

Local 

Taj 

Buildini 

Local 

Ta; 

Bond Pi 

Local 

Bal 



TABLE D 

Revenue Statement 
Revenues Applicable to School Year 1915-16, Collected in 1914-15 and 1915-16 

Common School Tuition Fund $162,997.43 

Revenues from State $ 62,481.04 

Common School Revenue $ 30,066.07 

Congressional Fund Interest 142.90 

Liquor License Revenues 31,691.65 

Dog Fund (Schools' proportion of Dog License Revenues) 681.42 

Local Tax 89,952.07 

Tax Levy (.35) plus Delinquent Taxes 89,952.07 

Miscellaneous Revenues 564.32 

Pupils' Tuition Fees (Transfers from Other School Districts). . . 512.35 

Depository Interest 51.97 

Special School Fund 133,681.58 

Local Tax 128,053.72 

Tax Levy (.50) plus Delinquent Taxes 128,053.72 

Miscellaneous Revenues 5,627.86 

Township Refund of Expenditures for Indigent Children 384.70 

Sales of School Farm Equipment 4,603.21 

Shop Sales 584.75 

Miscellaneous Sales of Supplies 55.20 

Compulsory Education Fund 12,805.37 

Local Tax 12,805.37 

Tax Levy (.05) plus Delinquent Taxes 12,805.37 

Vocational Instruction Fund 25,610.75 

Local Tax oc K 25,610.75 

Tax Levy (.10) plus Delinquent Taxes 25,610.75 

Building Fund 38,416.11 

Local Tax 38,416.11 

Tax Levy (.15) plus Delinquent Taxes 38,416.11 

Bond Principal and Interest Fund „ „„ „ 22,766.50 

Local Tax , nau ^ 22,756.50 

Balance available from previous school year 1,787.95 

Tax Levy (.10) plus Delinquent Taxes $25,610.76 

Less amount in excess of requirements and therefore not 
available until ensuing school year 4,642.21 20,968.55 

Loan Funds «««« 51 > 010 - 66 

Bond Issues M «« « 51,010.56 

Bond Proceeds 51,010.56 

Summary ToUl W ., 1M 437,278.30 

Revenues from State „?S'?Sl?„ 

Local Taxes ($1.25) 31 l$X 

Hr^:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;: «SKS 437,278.80 




IQIJ 

o 

o 



i9i( 
O 



Reve 
Defi( 



TABLE E 

FUND STATEMENT 

August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 

Common School Tuition Fund 

(as of July 31, 1916) 



Receipts 



1915-16 Revenues 
Collections in 1914-15 . 
Collections in 1915-16. 



1916-17 Revenues 
Collections in 1915-16. 



$ 31,499.00 


Warrants 1914-15. 
Warrants 1915-16 

Surplus 


Disbursements 




121,498.43 












$152,997.43 




35,588.50 








$188,585.93 


$188,585.93 



Special School Fund* 
(as of July 31, 1916) 



Receipts 



Disbursements 



Revenues 19^-16 $210,513.81 

Deficit (unpaid 1915-16 Warrants). . . . 21,386.65 



Warrants 1914-15. 
Warrants 1915-16. 



$231,900.46 



$135,781.94 
96,118.52 

$231,900.46 



'Includes Compulsory Education Fund, Vocational Instruction Fund, and Building Fund. 

Bond Principal and Interest Fund 
(as of July 31, 1916) 
Receipts Disbursements 



Surplus from 1914-15 $ 1,787.95 

Revenues 1915-16 

Available 1915-16 $20,968.55 

Available 1916-17 4,642.21* 25,610.76 



Warrants r9rs-i6. 
Surplus 

Cash 



$27,398.71 



$22,756.50 
4,642.21 

$27,398.71 



'Amount in excess of 1015-16 Bond principal and interest requirements. 

Loan Funds 
(as of July 31, 1916) 
Receipts 



Disbursements 



Revenues 
Bond Proceeds $51,010.56 



Warrants 1915-16 $51,010.56 






Total 

Administration Pla 
Emerson School. . . 
Froebel School. . . . 
Jefferson School. . . 
Beveridge School. . 
Tolleston School . . 
Glen Park School . 
24th Ave. School . . 
West Gary School. 

Clarke School 

Ambridge School. . 
School Farm 

■Genera] offices, barn 



Inventory of Land, 

{Estimated — < 



PLANT 


TO 


Total 


$1 016 








3 








433 






22 








30 




5 




1 




5 




3 











'General offices, bams, and storehouses. 




Sta: 



Issuec 
Aug. 1, 1! 
Nov. 1, 1! 
Apr. 24, 1 
Oct. 15, 1 
Feb. 15, 1 
Oct 2, 19: 
Feb. 17, 1 
Nov. 1, IS 
Nov. 2, 1! 
Dec. 1, 19 

Total Issue 
Inherited 
Townsb 



TABLE H— THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE 1 

EXPENDITURES IN SUMMARY FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY ORGANIZATION DIVISIONS 

AND CHARACTER OF EXPENDITURES 



ORGANIZATION DIVISIONS 



Total 

Administrative and General 

Day School 

Saturday School 

Night School 

Summer School 

Sunday School 

Capital Outlays and Debt Payments. 



$335,962.81 



55,576.43 
182,004.39 
12,427.45 
22,641.76 
13,544.64 
3,142.18 
46,625.96 



CHARACTER OP EXPENDITURES 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER THAN 
UPKEEP AND 
DEPRECIATION 



$239,645.05 



21,047.72 
166,841.30 
12,427.45 
22,641.76 
13,544.64 
3,142.18 



$15,793.36 



630.27 
15,163.09* 



$255,438.41 



21,677.99 
182,004.39 
12,427.45 
22,641.76 
13,544.64 
3,142.18 



CAPITAL OUTLAYS AND DEBT PAYMENTS 



$33,898.44 



33,898.44 



CAPITAL OUTLAYS 



$17,267.10 



17,267.10 



DEBT PAYMENTS 



$29,358.86 



29,358.86 



'See details supporting this table in schedules H-i, 3,3.4, S. 6, and 7 and their subdivisions. 

The item of upkeep is distributable to all school organizations but is here distributed to day school only. 



SCHEDULE H-l— ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL SERVICES 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI S , TO JULY 3 I, l 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 





TOTAL 














CURRENT EXPENSES 




— 








- 








OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 






UPKEEP OF PROPER! 




v '"'"""' a 




■Y 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 


TOTAL 


RENT 


INSURANCE 


INTEREST 






SALARIES AND WAGES 


POSTAGE 


EXPRESS, FREIGHT 
AND DRAYAGE 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 
EQULPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE OF 

BUILDINGS 
(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 




SUB-FUNCTION 


OFFICIALS AND 
EXECUTIVES 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


TOTAL 




$55,576.43 


$14,541.85 


$2,803.42 


$215.00 


$85.05 


$948.99 


$2,453.41 


$21,047.72 


$94.33 


$535.94 


$630.27 









$21,677.99 


$30.00 


$619.69 


(33,248.85 


$33,898.44 


General Administration 


12,402.51 


8,081.85 


1,636.44 


215.00 


85.05 


719.85 


1.420.98(a) 


12,159.17 




243.34 


243.34 






12,402.51 










Staff Service 


1,994.16 
7,640.14 

2,425.95 
342.26 


443.75 
6,000.00 

1,320.00 
318.10 


485.77 
485.77 

664.90 


165.00 
50.00 


85.05 


569.19 
150.66 


l,064.64(a) 
322.63 

9.55 
24.16 


1,994.16 
7,627.64 

2,195.11 
342.26 




12.50 
230.84 


12.50 
230.84 








1,994.16 
7,640.14 

2,425.96 
342.26 














Property Service 


37,147.61 


1,800.00 


810.00 






84.44 


207.47 


2,901.91 


94.33 


252.93 


347.26 






_ 


3,249.17 
91.42 

1,821.75 
681.12 
654.88 


30.00 


619.69 


33,248.86 


33,898.44 


Custody and Disbursement of Funds (Treasurer) .... 


91.42 
33,898.44 

1,821.75 
681.12 
654.88 


1,800.00 


521.53 

288.47 






16.94 
67.50* 


91.42 

21.75 
50.61 
43.69* 


91.42 

1,821.75 
589.08 
399.66 


92.04 
2.29 


252.93* 


92.04 

255.22 






80.00 


619.59(b) 


33.248.85(c) 


33,898.44 


Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Heat, Light, and Power Service (Supervision) .... 
Provision and Storage of Supplies and Materials .... 


Instructional Service: 
Instruction of Pupils in Other Institutions 


267.03 












267.03 


267.03 














267.03 












5,759.28 


4,660.00 


356.98 






144.70 


557.93 


5,719.61 




39.67 


39.67 








5,759.28 
















730.84 

5,009.74 

18.70 


230.00 
4,430.00 


356.98 






15.15 

110.85 

18.70 


485.69 

72.24 


730.84 

4,970.07 

18.70 




39.67 


39.67 








730.84 

5,009.74 

18.70 














Provision of Clothing and School Supplies to Indi- 
gent Pupils 





















•Balances shown represent net cost after deduction of credits. 



(a) Includes item of $790.90, part of the cost of the Gary school exhibit at Panama 
Exposition, San Francisco. 



(b) Insurance 

Employees' Compensation $3(5.83 

Security Insurance J7-50 

Other Insurance HJaJb $biy.5y 



'c) Interest 

On Unpaid Warrants $ 8,344.43 

On Contracts 2,147.92 

On Bonds 22.7S6.50 $33,248.85 



SCHEDULE H-2— DAY SCHOOLS 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total 



General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
Care of grounds 



Heat, Light, and Power Service . 



Laundry Service 

Janitorial Service. . ._ 

Other Building Service 

Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment. 



Instructional Service. 



Instruction Supervision: 

Supervision-General Instruction 

Supervision-Industrial Instruction .... 
Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Mechanical Drawing 

Cabinet Shop 

Pattern Shop 

Foundry 

Forge 

Machine Shop 

Plumbing Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop . , . - 

Paint Shop - 

Print Shop 

Shoe Shop 

Pottery 

Physical Instruction 



$182,004.39 



6,906.14 



39,633.45 



2,396.74 
16,866.06 

10,543.73 
1,658.16 
8,168.76 



135,464.80 



5,503.24 
1,959.18 

79,169.07 
2,555.27 

3,194.57 
2,505.66 
3,463.43 
3,041.71 
3,091.71 

2,205.81 
Z.669.26 

3,828.36* 
2,299.53 
226.71* 
259.88* 
933.34* 
616.94* 
620.66* 
215.84* 
250.60* 
161.50* 
974.37* 
551.67 
280.49 
14,886.00 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHEB THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 



SALARIES AND 1 



SUPERVISORS, 

PRINCIPALS, AND 

TEACHERS 



$133,257.20 



6,030.00 



127,227.20 



5,175.00 
1,400.00 

78.001.07 
2,286.25 

3,137.25 
2,388.50 
3,200.00 
2,917.28 
2,859.17 

2,153.75 
2,587.00 

3,517.91* 

2,200.00 

138.08* 

105.91* 

626.97* 

380.92* 

430.13* 

113.02* 

117.26* 

63.40* 

780.58* 

551.67 

270.83 

11,825.25 



$15,968.16 



1,631.28 
3,935.11 

8,081.80 



1,773.03 



152.97 
295.18 



$1,206.72 



1,324.88 



964.79 



167.04 
248.00 

353.38 

.75 

19.96 
39.07 
25.88 
20.78 
31.30 

.12 
.06 

10.99 
4.65 
3.00 
2.12 

13.75 
2.00 
3.22 
1.00 
1.36 

1.92 



14.44 



JShops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost «%*^J ^JS^^ 
lAbbreviations of F, G and E, end W in this column represent fuel, gas and electnaty, and water, respecuv y 



PUPILS* FUEL, WATER, GAS OTHER OPERATING 

SUPPLIES AND ELECTRICrrYt SUPPLTE: 



$1,590.54 



1,590.54 



405.63 
13.27 

24.80 

24.89 

204.60 

2.53 

39.85 

43.39 
4.16 

176.97* 
29.88 
48.33* 
22.87* 
9.32* 
96.26* 

100.38* 
90.51* 
58.08* 
80.31* 
95.84* 

9.66 
9.01 



$9,830.28 



9,830.28 



f 7,735.84 
g+e 522.69 



$3,772.10 



2,241.91 



23.05 
437.52 



1,781.34 



$1,216.30 



26.04 
65.00 

2.81 

78.10 

76.76 

38.44 

3.31 

7.81 

7.92 

41.41 



1,182.59 



702.89 



2.00 
70.53 



543.95 
86.41 



434.32 



243.39 



9.58 



5.62 
61.36 



18.80 
29.68 



$166,841.30 



6,897.96 



57.66 



1,656.33 
12,701.69 
* 
10,407.09 

1,658.16 



133,520.07 



5,503.24 
1,943.18 

79,003.47 
2,300.27 

3,191.59 
2,452.46 
3,430.48 
2,946.21 
2,991.68 

2,197.26 
2,610.02 

3,761.59* 
2,299.53 
189.41* 
133.71* 
728.14* 
555.94* 
572.17* 
207.84* 
184.51* 
151.63* 
919.75* 
551.67* 
280.49 
14,413.83 



REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 



$12,147.67 



12,053.05 



498.20 
4,021.35 



7,533.50 



94.62 



$3,015.42 



94.62 



8.18 



1,157.13 



242.21 
143.02 



136.64 
635.26 



1,850.11 



16.00 



165.60 
255.00 



$15,163.09 



8.18 



13,210.18 



740.41 
"4,164.37 

136.64 
8,168.76 



1,944.73 



16.00 



165.60 
255.00 



472.17 



2.98 


2.98 


53.20 


53.20 


32.95 


32.95 


95.50 


95.50 


100.03 


100.03 


8.55 


8.55 


59.24 


59.24 


66.77 


66.77 


37.30 


37.30 


31.55 


126.17 


205.20 


205.20 


61.00 


61.00 


48.49 


48.49 


8.00 


8-.00 


66.09 


66.09 


9.87 


9.87 


54.62 


54.62 



(M PltKCIATION OF PROPERTY 



SCHEDULE H-2-a— EMERSON DAY SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total. 



General Administration: 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
Care of Grounds 



Heat, Light and Power Service. 



Laundry Service 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 

Maintenance of Land, Buildings and Equipment . 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Mechanical Drawing 

Pattern Shop 

Foundry 

Forge 

Machine Shop 

Plumbing Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Print Shop 

Physical Instruction 



, $50,150.28 



12,502.01 



953.27 
6,095.45 

3,191.63 

469.96 

1,791.70 



35,425.47 



15,694.45 
1,378.38 

334.25 
1,344.49 
2,157.50 
1,541.91 
2,194.04 

1,270.04 
1,119.99 

1,222.19 

259.88* 

933.34* 

616.94* 

620.66* 

23.14* 

18.14* 

499.16* 

4,196.97 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



r UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$33,531.25 



1,800.00 



31,731.25 



15,217.25 
1,186.25 

318.75 
1,294.00 
2,000.00 
1,451.44 
1,980.92 

1,253.75 
1,100.00 

1,200.00 

105.91 

626.97* 

380.92= 

430.13* 

23.14* 

18.14* 

452.93* 

2,690.75 



$5,563.68 



214.15 



4,723.33 



831.59 

1,587.34 

• 

2,304.40 



$496.70 



170.58 



326.12 



205.19 
.75 

12.46 
31.59 
12.45 
13.30 
23.03 

.12 
.0 s 

1.1 

%1 



626.20 



35 



1.92 
2.51 



$590.71 



$3,086.32 



590.71 



110.79 
11.38 

3.04 

10.95 

139.66 

1.22 
37.30 

16.17 



26 54 
2187 

■ .* 
J J? 
MM 



9.10* 
1.73 



$1,390.90 



3,086.32 



f 2,519.83 
g+e 149.49 



w 417.00 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



526.19 



10.21 
188.44 

327.54 



864.71 



2.81 
78.10 
76.76 
38.44 



8.61 
859.99 



$812.55 



38.07 



598.66 



$45,472.11 



2.00 
9.42 



534.28 
52.96 



175.82 



89.82 



61.36 
18.80 



5.84 



2,222.80 
8,934.50 



843.80 
4,454.52 



3,166.22 
469.96 



REP ALUS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 



$3,361.90 



3,267.28 



34,314.81 



15,623.05 
1,198.38 

334.25 
1,336.54 
2,152.11 
1,465.96 
2,102.61 

1,270.04 
1,118.86 

1,222.19 
133.71* 
728.14* 
555.94* 
572.17* 
23.14* 
18.14* 
472.56* 
3,987.02 



30.40 
1,636.93 



1,599.95 



$1,316.27 



94.62 



94.62 



300.23 



79.07 
4.00 

25.41 
191.75 



1,016.04 



71.40 
180.00 



7.95 
5.39 
75.95 
91.43 



1.13 



31.55 

205.20 

61.00 

48.49 



26.60 
209.95 



$4,678.17 



3,567.51 



109.47 
1,640.93 



25.41 
1,791.70 



1,110.06 



l»ll'HH'!.U ION in' I'KOl', It TV 



71.40 
180.00 



7.95 
5.39 
75.95 
91.43 



1.13 



126.17 

205.20 

61.00 

48.49 



26.60 
209.95 



OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 

(Including Grounds) 



OBBOLBSCJNCl 



SCHEDULE H-2-b— FROEBEL DAY SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total. 



General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) . 



Property Service. 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
Care of Grounds 



Heat, Light, and Power Service . 



Laundry Service 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service ; 

Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment. 



Instructional Sendee. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction. 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Mechanical Drawing 

Cabinet Shop 

Plumbing Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Paint Shop 

Print Shop 

Pottery 

Shoe Shop 

Physical Instruction 



$68,104.41 



2,155.99 



15,442.72 



1,079.06 
6,414.20 
* 
4,386.37 
772.11 
2,790.98 



50,505.70 



30,496.29 
1,176.89 

1,349.31 
1,161.17 
1,305.93 
1,499.80 
897.67 

624.39 
791.23 

1.558.81* 
1,077.34 
226.71* 
192.70* 
232.46* 
1S1.50* 
475.21* 
280.49 
551.67 
6,446.13 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER^THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$49,439.11 



47,639.11 



30,205.20 
1,100.00 

1,331.25 
1,094.50 
1,200.00 
1,465.84 
878.25 

600.00 

746.25 

1,505.44 

1,000.00 

138.08 

89.88 

99.12 

63.40 

327.65 

270.83 

551.67 

4,971.75 



$6,317.89 



267.95 



5,351.26 



791.19 
1,221.18 

3,338.89 



$178.87 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



698.68 



49.26 



129.61 



68.91 



7.50 
7.48 
13.43 

7.48 
8.27 



698.68 



$643.80 



$3,808.12 



643.80 



96.87 
1.89 

9.86 

13.94 

64.94 

1.31 

2.55 

24.39 



8.18 





42.08 


3.00 


9.34 


3.00 


48.33" 


1.00 


90.51" 


1.36 


58.08" 




80.31" 




86.74 




9.66 



3.00 



3,808.12 



I f 2,847.72 
;g+e 190.85 



$1,757.25 



1,117.81 



5.84 
174.42 



937.55 



$223.60 



639.44 



G5.00 

3.31 
7.81 
7.92 
32.80 



522.60 



38.78 



45.38 



42.82 



139.44 



$62,368.64 



2,155.99 



10,322.57 



797.03 
4,476.99 



4,276.44 
772.11 



REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 



49,890.08 



90.38 


30,461.36 




1,101.89 


.70 


1,349.31 




1,115.92 




1,278.37 


5.62 


1,480.25 




889.07 




624.39 




746.25 




1,547.52 




1,077.34 




189.41 




184.70 




166.37 




151.63 




447.19 




280.49 




551.67 


42.74 


6,246.95 



$4,594.13 



4,594.13 



177.43 
1,849.73 



2,566.97 



$1,141.64 



526.02 



104.60 

87.48 



109.93 
224.01 



$5,735.77 



5,120.15 



DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 



OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUTLDLNGS 

(Including Grounds) 



282.03 
1,937.21 

109.93 
2,790.98 



615.62 



615.62 



34.93 
75.00 



45.25 

27.56 

19.55 

8.60 



44.98 
11.29 

37.30 
8.00 

66.09 
9.87 

28.02 

199.18 



34.93 
75.00 



45.25 

27.56 

19.55 

8.60 



44.98 
11.29 

37.30 
8.00 

66.09 
9.87 

28.02 



199.18 



SCHEDULE H-2-c— JEFFERSON DAY SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



. SERVICE 


TOTAL 












CURRENT 


EXPENSES 










OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 




SALARD2S AND WAGES 




SUPPLIES 




MISCELLANEOUS 

EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPATRS TO 

B GILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 
EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP BUILDINGS 

( Including Grounds; 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUTPUENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLHCS 


PUPILS' 


FUEL, WATER. GAS OTHER OPERATING 
AND ELECTRICITyt SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 


Total 


$19,851.04 
1,254.64 


$16,395.52 


$695.83 


$68.41 


$130.74 


$934.15 


$290.13 


$31.86 


$18,546.64 ' 
1,254.64 


$1,104.01 


$200.39 


$1,304.40 








General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 


1,170.00 


64.84 


17.56 








2.24 












Property Service 


3,068.43 

35.55 

1,310.81 

578.97 
203.16 
939.94 




630.99 




934.15 


264.09 


14.13 


1,843.36 


1,104.01 


121.06 


1,225.07 








Operation Buildings and Grounds: 




7.00 
232.45 
391.54 






{ i 683.59 
(g+e 55.03 

w 195.53 


2.00 
74.66 
187.43 


6.50 

7.63 


9.00 

1,052.23 

578.97 
203.16 


20.44 
247.84 

835.73 


6.11 
10.74 

104.21 


26.55 
258.58 

939.94 
















Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment 






15,527.97 


15,225.52 




50.85 


130.74 




26.04 


15.49 


15,448.64 

11,433.03 

776.61 

2.83 
440.75 

1,386.44* 
1,408.98 




79.33 


79.33 








Elementary Instruction: 


11,454.77 

776.61 

2.83 
452.98 

1,403.92 
1,436.86 


11,334.87 
770.25 

440.75 

1,283.15* 
1.396.50 




37.74 

10.99* 
2.12 


51.91 
5.46 
2.83 

66.26* 
4.28 




26.04 


8.51 
.90 

6.08 




21.74 

12.23 

17.48 
27.88 


21.74 

12.23 

17.48 
27.88 








Science Instruction: 




Household Arts Instruction: 








Industrial Arts Instruction: 








===== 







•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-2-d— OTHER DAY SCHOOLS 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I S , TO JULY 3 I, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



FUNCTION 

SUB-FUNCTION 



Total. 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
Care of Grounds 



Heat, Light and Power Service. 



Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 

Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary Instruction: 

General Instruction. 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Physical Instruction 



General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 



536,436.24 



1,272.71 



8,620.29 



328.86 

3,045.60 

2,386.76 

212.93 

2,846.14 



26,543.24 



21,523.56 



734.40 

308.55 
305.06 

865.63* 
2,806.04 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$27,316.32 



1,260.00 



26,056.32 



21,243.75 



717.00 



300.00 
300.00 



729.32* 
2,766.25 



$2,942.61 



2,942.61 



1.50 

894.14 

2,046.97 



$47.70 $225.29 



$2,001.69 



4.53 



43.17 



41.54 



1.63 



2,001.69 



225.29 



146.06 

6.44 

4.16 
68.63* 



f 1,684.70 
g+e 127.32 



$333.82 



333.82 



5.00 
328.82 



$140.06 



$33,007.49 



9.67 
23.26 



95.34 



54.68 
7.98 



29.68 
3.00 



UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 



REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AN1 

GROUNDS 



$3,087.63 



1,264.53 



5,322.84 



6.50 

2,717.95 

2,385.46 
212.93 



26,420.12 



21,486.03 



731.42 



300.00 
304.16 



827.63 
2,770.88 



3,087.63 



269.93 
286.85 



2,530.85 



$341.12 



52.43 

40.80 

1.30 

115.29 



LM l lO.CIATION OF PROPERTY 



OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUn-DINGS 

(Including Grounds) 



$3,428.75 



8.18 



3,297.45 



322.36 

327.65 

1.30 

2,646.14 



123.12 



2.98 



3.55 
.90 



38.00 
35.16 



37.53 
2.98 



3.55 
.90 



38.00 
35.16 



•Shops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
^Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-3— SATURDAY SCHOOLS 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, 1916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



FUNCTION 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total . 



General Administration 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 



Property Service. 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 



Instructional Service. 



Instruction Supervision: 

Supervision-General Instruction 

Supervision-Industrial Instruction 
Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Mechanical Drawing 

Cabinet Shop 

Pattern Shop 

Foundry 

Forge 

Machine Shop 

Plumbing Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Paint Shop 

Print Shop 

Shoe Shop 

Pottery 

Physical Instruction 



$12,427.45 



791.16 



4,342.08 



2,458.78 

1,522.46 
360.84 



7,294.21 



553.63 
289.13 

i ,400.84 
159.33 

154.18 

83.51 

107.82 

242.23 

30.77 

67.90 
38.34 

517.63* 
201.31 
11.69* 
26.68* 
145.20* 
111.17* 
114.38* 
34.53* 
33.01* 
18.97* 
219.57* 
110.33 
54.17 
L567.89 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



AND WAGES 



SUPERVISORS 

PRINCIPALS AND 

TEACHERS 



$6,987.08 



670.00 



6,317.08 



509.25 
200.00 

2,188.90 
156.75 

140.65 
79.75 
94.00 

231.00 
29.00 

64.67 
33.75 

470.41* 

183.00 

2.04* 

21.17* 

125.26* 

76.18* 

86.02* 

17.98* 

19.82* 

1.34* 

171.94* 

110.33 

54.17 

1,249.70 



$1,890.79 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
t Abbreviations of F. G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



60.66 



1/714.S 



623.25 
1,091.55 



115.33 



16.98 
49.20 



49.15 



$184.60 



31.39 



153.21 



25.76 
39.93 

62.61 
.15 

3.53 
1.32 
2.37 
5.89 
1.32 



3.15 



$308.42 



308.42 



85.13 
2.43 

8.60 
2.44 
11.45 
4.21 
.45 

3.23 



1.95 


34.46* 


2.20 


16.11 




9.65* 


.38 


4.57* 


2.45 


1.87* 


.20 


19.24* 




20.08* 




15.96* 




11.63* 




16.05* 




39.09 



$2,069.71 



$763.27 



2,089.71 



S f 1,615.71 
I g+e 107.29 



w 346.71 



452.36 



97.46 
354.90 



310.91 



5.21 



.56 

15.62 

15.55 

8.28 

.59 

1.56 

1.58 

8.54 



253.42 



$223 58 



105.21 



15.07 

76.01 
14.13 

89.26 



1.64 

64.20 

1.40 

1.18 

3.76 
5.60 



11.53 



$12,427.45 



4,342.08 



2,458.78 

1,522.46 
360.84 



7,294.21 



553.63 
289.13 

2,400.84 
159.33 

154.18 

83.51 

107.82 

242.23 

30.77 

67.90 
38.34 

517.63* 

201.31 

11.69* 

26.68* 

145.20* 

111.17* 

114.38* 

34.53* 

33.01* 

18.97* 

219.57* 

110.33 

54.17 

1,567.89 



REPAIRS TO 

BUTLDDiGS AND 

GROUNDS 



DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 



OBSOLESCENCE 
OF BUILDINGS 

(Including Grounds) 



SCHEDULE H-3-a— EMERSON SATURDAY SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I 5> TO JULY 3 I, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OK BXPBNDITURB8 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total. 



General Admini itration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Heat, Light and Power Service 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Botany 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Mechanical Drawing 

Pattern Shop 

Foundry 

Forge 

Machine Shop 

Print Shop 

Physical Instruction 



$3,895.81 



261 94 



1,505.78 



898.60 

498.81 
108.37 



2,128.09 



670.24 
68.42 

28.57 
122.52 

45.40 
3.76 

97.43 
26.68* 
145.20' 
111.17* 
114.38* 
130.13* 
564.19 



CUXJUNT I mi s^t^ 



otu::r than itk.ef.p and depreciation 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$1,962.86 



200.00 



1,762.86 



591.27 
66.00 



20.63 
114.00 



42.17 



93.00 
21.17* 
125.26* 
76.18* 
86.02* 
106.41* 
420.75 



$560.23 



23.82 



536.41 



210.49 
325.92 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
•Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in.this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



$72.65 



26.83 



45.82 



35.03 
.15 



2.21 
4.57 



$109.16 



$740.70 



109.16 



22.04 
2.27 



5.73 
3.95 



3.23 



740.70 



f 604.75 
g+e 35.87 

w 100.08 



.33 


4.10 


.38 


4.57 


2.45 


1.87 


.20 


19.24 




20.08 




21.74 


.50 


.34 



|401 64 



218.12 



46.23 
172.83 



183.42 



.56 

15.62 

15.55 

8.28 

1.98 

141.43 



|48 87 



1159 



10.55 



2.26 
8.29 



26.83 



21.90 



3.76 



1.17 



Sv^loSl 



261.94 



1,605.78 



iTsnrr o» raonan 



utadisto 

buildings and 

nomaa 



888,60 

498.81 
108.37 



.u..N ,.r norun 



2,128.09 



67054 

68.42 

2857 
122.52 

45.40 
3.76 

97.43 
26.68* 
145.20* 
111.17* 
114.38* 
L30 18* 
564.19 






SCHEDULE H-3-b— FROEBEL SATURDAY SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 3 I, 1916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



service 

function 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total . 



General Administration : 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 



Property Service 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction. 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Science 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training. 

Mechanical Drawing 

Cabinet Shop 

Plumbing Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Paint Shop 

Print Shop 

Pottery 

Shoe Shop 

Physical Instruction 



$4,543.87 



246.34 



1,838.78 



1,011.64 

641.82 
185.32 



2,458.75 



575 
90 

113 
83 
107 
119 
30 



11.25 



185 

103 
11 
34 
33 
18 
89. 
54, 

110. 

683 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$2,295.42 



200.00 



2,095.42 



512.39 
90.75 

110.64 
79.75 
94.00 

117.00 
29.00 

11.25 

"177 33* 

po'oo 

2.04* 
17.98* 
19.82* 
1.34* 
65.53* 
54.17 
110.33 
512.10 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



$765.95 



687.16 



230.25 
456.91 



49.15 



$25.10 



23.07 



1.32 
1.32 
2.37 
1.32 
1.32 



1.87 



$127.53 



127.53 



19.37 
.16 

1.74 

2.44 

11.45 

.26 

.45 



8.41 
12.01 
9.65 

15.96 
11.63* 
16.05 
17.35* 



.60 



$913.95 



f 683.45 
g+e 45.80 



$274.39 



41.86 
110.25 



.59 

1.56 
1.58 
6.56 



111.99 



$141.53 



14.67 



85.56 



10.28 

74.66 
.62 



41.30 



31.62 



1.13 



8.55 



$4,543.87 



UPKEEP OF PROPERTV 



REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 



1,838.78 



1.011.64 

641.82 
185.32 



2,458.75 



575.55 
90.91 

113.70 
83.51 
107.82 
119.71 
30.77 

11.25 

185.74* 
103.88 
11.69* 
34.53* 
33.01* 
18.97* 
89.44 
54.17 
110.33 
683.77 



i'l l-Rl VIATION OP PROPERTY 



OBSOLESCENCE OF 

BUILDINGS 
(Tncludiog Grounds) 



SCHEDULE H-3-c— JEFFERSON SATURDAY SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 


CURRENT EXPENSES 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 




SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 
EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP BUILDINGS 

(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


pupils' 
supplies 


PUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITY! 


OTHER OPERAT- 
ING SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 


Total 


$1,096.13 


$723.08 


$146.96 


$4.61 


$23.63 


$141.00 


$41.61 


$15.24 


$1,096.13 














General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 


140.49 


130.00 


7.20 


1.62 








1.67 


140.49 














Property Service 


319.29 




139.76 






141.00 


36.40 


2.13 


319.29 














Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


151.89 

134.64 
32.76 




31.15 
108.61 






( f 101.82 
I g+e 7.65 

w 31.53 


10.37 
26.03 


.90 
1.23 


151.89 

134.64 
32.76 
























636.35 


593.08 




2.99 


23.63 




5.21 


11.44 


636.35 


















Elementary Instruction: 


318.16 

167.48* 
150.71 


297.55 

147.07* 
148.46 




1.95 
1.04 


10.38 
13.25* 




5.21 


10.23 
1.21 


318.16 

167.48* 
150.71 














Industrial Arts Instruction: 



















•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-3-d-OTHER SATURDAY SCHOOLS 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I 5 , TO JULY 31, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


Total 


CURRENT EXPENSES 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 




SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


repairs TO 

EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP BUDUHNGS 

(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


PUPILS' 
SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATER, CAS 
AND ELECTRICITY f 


OTHER OPERAT- 
ING SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 




$2,048.88 


$1,296.47 


$351.47 


$16.55 


$48.10 


$274.06 


$45.73 


$16.50 


$2,048.88 














General Administration: 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 


142.39 


140.00 




.91 








1.48 


142.39 














Property Service 


678.23 




351.47 






274.06 


45.73 


6.97 


678.23 














Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


396.65 

247.19 
34.39 




151.36 
200.11 






< f 225.69 
( g+e 17.97 

w 30.40 


45.73 


1.63 

1.35 
3.99 


396.65 

247.19 
34.39 














Other Building Service 






1,228.26 


1,156.47 




15.64 
15.41 

.23 


48.10 






8.05 


1,228.26 


















Elementary Instruction: 


836.89 

11.91 

22.50 
23.33 

164.41* 
169.22 


787.69 

9.38 

22.50 
22.50 

146.01 
168.39 




33.34 
1.13 

.83 
12.80* 






.45 
1.40 

5.60 
.60 


836.89 

11.91 

22.50 
23.33 

164.41* 
169.22 






1 






Science Instruction: 




Household Arts Instruction: 








Industrial Arts Instruction: 








1 





•Shops charged as " Instruction," balances shown representing net 
tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel 



cost after deduction of credits for production, 
gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-4-NIGHT SCHOOLS 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQIS, TO JULY 3L W^- ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS CHARAPTP* a™ „ 

=— ___ ' tHAKA CTER AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 

CURBENT EXPENSES ' 



SUB-FUNCTION 



Total. 



General Administration 



Executive Direction and Control (Asst. Supt ) 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 



Property Service 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds 
Heat, Light, and Power Service 
Janitorial Service. 
Other Building Service 



Instructional Service 




Instruction Supervision: 
Supervision-General Instruction 
Supervision-Industrial Instruction 
Elementary and Secondary Instruction 
General Instruction. . . . 
Commercial Instruction 
Science Instruction: 

Nature Study. 

Chemistry, 

Botany. 

Zoology 
Household Arts Instruction 

Domestic Arts 

Domestic Science 
Industrial Arts Instruction 

Manual Training 

Mechanical Drawing 

Cabinet Shop 

Pattern Shop 

Foundry 

Forge 

Machine Shop 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Paint Shop 

Print Shop 

Shoe Shop. 

Shop Electricity, 

Gas Engine Operating 
Physical Instruction .... 



•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production, 
t Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-4-a— EMERSON NIGHT SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I9*5> TO J ULY 3 1 . x 9 l6 - ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 














CURRENT EXPENSES 






OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION- 








UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 


FUNCTION 


SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 

EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 
(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


executive; 
supplies 


PUPILS' 
SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITY t 


OTHER OPERAT- 
ING SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 


Total 


$6,316.22 


$4,007.82 


$162.31 


$55.35 


$176.03 


$1,234.53 


$470.69 


$209.49 


$6,316.22 














General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 


336.36 


246.00 


43.75 


39.08 








7.53 


336.36 















Property Service 


1,733.42 




117.81 






1,234.53 


206.37 


174.71 


1,733.42 












Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


1,233.52 

319.30 
180.60 




86.65 
31.16 






\ f 1,007.93 
( g+e 59.80 

w 166.80 


75.37 
131.00 


3.77 

157.14 
13.80 


1,233.52 

319.30 
180.60 














Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 




Instructional Service 


4,246.44 


3,761.82 


.75 


16.27 


176.03 




264.32 


27.25 


4,246.44 














Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 


863.19 
431.61 

75.86 
37.89 

104.80 
38.51 

124.32 
291.65 
161.68 
167.02 
169.67 
285.06 
173.72* 
80.00 
64.75 
1,176.71 


816.21 
429.99 

60.34 
26.73 

102.64 
36.00 

124.32 

288.69 

158.25 

143.00 

133.62 

260.25 

98.13 

80.00 

64.75 

938.90 


.75 


15.14 
.10 

.21 

.22 

.13 
.13 

.34 


14.69 
1.52 

15.52 
4.14 

2.16 

2.74 
3.05 

13.48 
25.55 
18.68 
74.27* 

.23 




.38 
10.41 
10.37 
6.13 
1.32 

235.71 


17.15 

6.81 
2.51 

.78 


863.19 
431.61 

75.86 
37.89 

104.80 
38.51 

124.32 
291.65 
161.68 
167.02 
169.67 
285.06 
173.72 
80.00 
64.75 
1,176.71 








, : 










Science Instruction: 
Household Arts Instruction: 








Industrial Arts Instruction: 


































•Shops charged as " Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
lAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-4-b— FROEBEL NIGHT SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 


CURRENT EXPENSES 


FUNCTION 


OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 


SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 
EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 

(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


pupils' 
supplies 


FUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITYf 


OTHER OPERATING 


TOTAL 


Total 


$8,761.71 


$5,652.84 


$737.86 


$49.16 


$176.69 


$1,523.26 


$446.61 


$175.29 


$8,761.71 


















General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 


423.37 


405.00 




13.20 








5.17 


423.37 
















2,318.20 




398.86 






1,523.26 


253.50 


142.58 


2,318.20 


















Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


1,630.95 

378.41 
308.84 




328.61 
70.25 






( f 1,139.11 
Jg+e 76.34 

w 307.81 


69.76 
183.74 


17.13 

124.42 
1.03 


1,630.95 

378.41 
308.84 
























6,020.14 


5,247.84 


339.00 


35.96 


176.69 




193.11 


■27.54 


6,020.14 














Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 


3,046.30 
123.13 

8.93 

168.71 

280.32 
205.96 
110.62* 
119.37 
114.64* 
22.92* 
94.00 
1,725.24 


2,976.33 
123.02 

8.00 

166.00 

274.71 
204.71 
73.71* 
91.45 
42.41* 
* 

94.00 
1,193.50 


339.00 


35.96 


12.92 
.11 

.18 

2.71 

5.61 
1.25 
36.91 
26.88 
71.17 
18.55* 

.40 




1.04 
1.06 
4.37* 

186.64 


21.09 

.75 

5.70 


3,046.30 
123.13 

8.93 

168.71 

280.32 
205.96 
110.62* 
119.37 
114.64 
22.92 
94.00 
1,725.24 


















Science Instruction: 
Household Arts Instruction : 




Industrial Arts Instruction: 






















l 




1 


•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net c 
tAbbreviatioos of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gi 


i>st after deduction 
s and electricity, a 


of credits for produ 
nd water, respectivel 


ction. 





























SCHEDULE H-4-c— JEFFERSON NIGHT SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I9IS, TO J UL Y 3h 19*6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SUB-FUNCTION 



General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction ' 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Household Arts Instruction: 

Domestic Arts 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Mechanical Drawing 

Sheet Metal Shop 

Shop Electricity 

Physical Instruction 



$2,296.78 



282.13 



414.89 



258.04 

97.86 
58.99 



1,599.76 



475.13 
34.44 



176.25 

602.53 

169.49 

2.33 

4.43 
94.81 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



[ UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



SALARIES AND WAGES 



$1,830.60 



267.00 



1,563.60 



455.66 
34.44 

39.83 

175.93 

587.49 

169.49 

2.33 

4.43 

94.00 



$6.80 



93.89 



42.89 
51.00 



5.72 



5.72 



$19.33 



19.33 



6.92 

.52 

.32 

11.57 



$251.63 



251.63 



( f 181.11 
I g+e 13.75 

w 56.77 



$68.99 



65.52 



18. G6 
46.86 



$25.54 



14.05 



3.85 



1.63 
2.22 



7.64 



6.83 



$2,296.78 



282.13 



414.89 



REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AN 

GROUNDS 



258.04 

97.86 
58.99 



1,599.76 



475.13 
34.44 

40.35 

176.25 

602.53 

169.49 

2.33 

4.43 
94.81 



DEPRECIATION OP PROrERTY 



OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 

(Including GroundsJ 



tAbbreviations of F, G aod E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-4-d— OTHER NIGHT SCHOOLS 

-NDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 31, IQ16. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 










CURRENT EXPENSES 


~ ' 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 




SALARIES / 


ND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


EQUIPMENT; 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 

{Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP EQUIPMENT 


" 




PRINCIPALS 
AND TEJlCHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITYt 


OTHER OPERATING 
SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 


Total 


$1,804.53 


$1,266.37 


$283.57 


$10.88 


$31.03 


$176.34 


$28.32 


$8.02 


$1,804.53 
















| 




General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . . . 


197.59 


196.00 




.61 






.98 


197.59 














432.83 




283.57 






176.34 


28.32 


4.60 


492.83 




















Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


300.44 

170.70 
21.69 




142.04 
141.53 






( f 145.90 
Ig+e 11.40 

w 19.04 


28.32 


1.10 

.85 
2.65 


300.44 

170.70 
21.69 


















Other Building Service 








1,114.11 


1,070.37 




10.27 


31.03 






2.44 


1,114.11 




















Elementary Instruction: 


619.10 
180.72 

37.36 
37.92 

150.61 
88.40 


586.93 
180.72 

37.36 
37.36 

140.00 
88.00 




10.27 


21.90 

.56 

8.57 






2.04 
.40 


619.10 
180.72 

37.36 
37.92 

150.61 

88.40 


















Household Arts Instruction: 








Industrial Arts Instruction: 






























==- 



tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-5— SUMMER SCHOOLS 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST 


I, IQI5> TO 


JULY 3] 


, 1916. 


ANALYSIS 


BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND 


OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 




SERVICE 


TOTAT, 








CURRENT EXPENSES 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 


FUNCTION 


SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 
EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE 

OF BUILDINGS 

(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


SUPERVISORS 

PRINCIPALS 

AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


PUPILS' 
SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATE2, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITYt 


OTHER OPERATING 
SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 


Total 


$13,544.64 


$9,552.86 


$2,360.75 


$142.85 


$61.48 


$885.43 


$459.70 


$81.57 


$13,544.64 



















General Administration: 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . . 


1,259.79 


1,195.42 


64.37 










1,259.79 














Property Service 


3,012.85 




1,834.60 






885.43 


219.46 


73.36 


3,012.85 


















Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


263.73 

1,184.76 

* 

1,354.87 

209.49 




263.73 
450.01 

1,120.86 






( f 644.11 
I g+e 40.84 

w 200.43 


43.54 

* 

175.92 


6.26 

58.09 
9.01 


263.73 
1,184.76 

* 

1,354.87 
209.49 
































9,272.00 


8,357.44 


461.78 


142.85 


61.48 




240.24 


8.21 


9,272.00 


















Instruction Supervision: 


1,303.79 
607.71 

1,962.74 
433.36 

473.81 
192.50 
610.84 
475.46 
257.99 

77.50 

269.97 

154.17 

52.93* 

2,399.23 


1,234.37 
508.34 

1,870.64 
427.08 

472.50 
192.50 
610.84 
474.62 
255.79 

77.50 

269.97 

154.17 

37.12 

1,772.00 


31.87 

49.20 

380.71 


37.55 
50.17 

47.29 

.84 

7.00 


39.00 
6.28 

1.31 
.40 

14.49* 




1.32 

233.92 


5.81 

1.80 

.60 


1,303.79 
607.71 

1,962.74 
433.36 

473.81 
192.50 
610.84 
475.46 
257.99 

77.50 


1 








i 








Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 








Science Instruction: 
Nature Study 

Household Arts Instruction: 




Industrial Arts Instruction: 


269.97 






154.17 

52.93* 

2,399.23 







•Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tAbbreviatioas of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-5-a— EMERSON SUMMER SCHOOL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SUB-FUNCT..ON 



Total . 



General Administration: 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 



Property Service . 



Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
Care of Grounds 



Heat, Light, and Power Service. 

Laundry Service 

Janitorial Service. . 

Other Building Service 



Instructional Service. 



Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Physics 

Chemistry 

Botany 

Zoology 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Print Shop 

Physical Instruction 



5,775.76 



364.93 



1,190.25 



135.85 
549.76 



450.45 
54.19 



2,220.58 



477.88 
85.00 

27.50 
433.34 
290.65 
257.99 

52.93* 
595.29 



CURRENT EXPENSES 



OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 



$2,247.13 



335.00 



1,912.13 



462.89 
85.00 

27.50 
433.34 
289.81 
255.79 

37.12* 
320.68 



$872.43 



29.93 



706.65 



135.85 
205.70 



365.10 



135.85 



135.85 



•qhnns chanted as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
tlbbreSs o?F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas, and electricity, and water, respectively. 



$15.54 



$15.18 



14.70 



$370.37 



15.18 



.29 



.40 

14.49 



370.37 



f 302.38 
g+e 17.94 



$247.44 



107.96 



22.61 



85.35 



139.48 



1.32 
138.16 



$7.67 



5.27 



1.13 

* 

4.14 



$3,775.76 



364.93 



2.40 



.60 



135.85 
549.76 



450.45 
54.19 



UPKLia- up puun urv 



REPAIRS TO 

BCrEDINGS AND 

CROUNDS 



2,220.58 



477.88 
85.00 

27.50 
433.34 
290.65 
257.99 

52.93* 
595.29 



DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 



OIISOLESCENCE 

OP BUILDINGS 

( Including Grounds) 



SCHEDULE H-5-b-FROEBEL SUMMER SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM 


AUGUST I, 


1915, TO 


JULY 31, 


I916. ANALYSIS BY 


SERVICE 


DIVISIONS, 


FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF 


EXPENDITURES 






TOTAL 


CURRENT EXPENSES 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 


FUNCTION 


SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 

EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


OBSOLESCENCE OF 

BUILDINGS 
I Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE OP 

EQUIPMENT 




SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCIPALS AND 
TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


PUPILS* 
SDPPLIES 


PUEL, WATER, CAS 
AND ELECTRICITYt 


OTHER OPERAT- 
ING SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 




$4,872.69 


$3,081.64 


$1,085.57 


$20.47 


$12.47 


$456.96 


$176.56 


$39.02 


$4,872.69 














General Administration: 
Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 


404.16 


370.84 


33.32 












404.16 
















1,379.17 




807.39 






456.96 


75.80 


39.02 


1,379.17 














Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


127.88 

635.00 

* 

523.65 

92.64 




127.88 
244.31 
* 
435.20 






$ f 341.73 
\ g+e 22.90 

w 92.33 


20.93 

54.87 


5.13 

* 

33.58 
.31 


127.88 
635.00 

523.65 
92.64 




















( 


















3,089.36 


2,710.80 


244.86 


20.47 


12.47 




100.76 




3,089.36 














Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 


326.32 
157.64 

197.50 
165.00 
177.50 
184.81 

38.75 

216.04 

154.17 

1,471.63 


297.48 
153.54 

197.50 
165.00 
177.50 
184.81 

38.75 

216.04 

154.17 

1,126.01 


244.86 


20.47 


8.37 
4.10 




100.76 




326.32 
157.64 

197.50 
165.00 
177.50 
184.81 

38.75 

216.04 

154.17 

1,471.63 


















Science Instruction: 
















Household Arts Instruction: 




Industrial Arts Instruction: 






. = 



•Shops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost after deduction of "^ ££££*»• 
t Abbrtviations of F. G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electncty, and water, respectively. 



SCHEDULE H-5-c— JEFFERSON SUMMER SCHOOL 



EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM 



AUGUST I I0I5 TO JULY 3 1, I9* 6 - ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



FUNCTION 

SUB-FUNCTION 



Total 

General Administration: 

Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 

Property Service 

Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 

Janitorial Service 

Other Building Service 

Instructional Service 

Elementary Instruction: 

General Instruction 

Commercial Instruction 

Science Instruction: 

Nature Study 

Industrial Arts Instruction: 

Manual Training 

Physical Instruction 

t Abbreviation W in this column represents water. 



$1,345.46 



271.95 



184.17 



151.41 
32.76 



362.07 
190.72 



152.50 



53.93 
130.12 



CURRENT EXPENSES 




270.83 



854.55 



336.46 
188.54 



152.50 



53.93 
123.12 



1.12 



124.80 



124.80 



9.56 



2.56 



7.00 



19.42 



17.24 
2.18 



31.53 



31.53 



2.10 



25.74 



24.51 
1.23 



5.81 



5.81 



271.95 



184.17 



151.41 
32.76 



889.34 



362.07 
190.72 



152.50 



53.93 
130.12 



SCHEDULE H-5-d— OTHER SUMMER SCHOOLS 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 












CURRENT EXPENSES 


. 


FUNCTION 


OTHER THAN UPKEEP ANT* DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OP PROPERTY DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 


SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


REPAIRS TO 

BUILDINGS AND 

CROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 1 OBSOLESCENCE 
EQUIPMENT TOTAL OF BUILDINGS 

J (Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OP EQUIPMENT 





SUB-FUNCTION 


PRINCTPALS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITY f 


OTHER OPERATING 
SUPPLIES 


TOTAL 




$1,639.23 


$1,356.00 


$195.76 


$9.56 


$14.41 


$26.57 


$33.60 


$3.33 


$1,639.23 












General Administration : 


218.75 


218.75 














218.75 














259.26 




195.76 






26.57 


33.60 


3.33 


259.26 












Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


229.36 
29.90 




195.76 






w 26.57 


33.60 


3.33 


229.36 
29.90 






















1,161.22 


1,137.25 




9.56 


14.41 








1,161.22 



















Elementary Instruction: 


796.47 

123.81 

38.75 
202.19 


773.81 

122.50 

38.75 
202.19 




9.56 


13.10 
1.31 








796.47 

123.81 

38.75 ] 
202.19 














Science Instruction: 




Household Arts Instruction: 















tAbbreviation W in this column represents water. 



SCHEDULE H-6— SUNDAY SCHOOLS— EMERSON AND FROEBEL 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 



tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 



SERVICE 


TOTAL 






CURRENT EXPENSES 


^— 




OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 


UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 


DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 




SALARIES AND WAGES 


SUPPLIES 


MISCELLANEOUS 
EXPENSE 


TOTAL 


BUILDINGS AND 
GROUNDS 


REPAIRS TO 

EQUIPMENT 


TOTAL 


| 







SUPERVISORS 
AND TEACHERS 


ASSISTANTS AND 
OPERATIVE FORCE 


EXECUTIVE 
SUPPLIES 


PUPILS' 
SUPPLIES 


FUEL, WATER, GAS 
AND ELECTRICITVt 


OTHER OPERAT- 
ING SUPPLIES 


OF BUILDINGS 
(Including Grounds) 


OBSOLESCENCE 
OF EQUTPMENT 


TOTAL 


Total 


$3,142.18 


$229.75 


$696.82 






$1,654.65 


$529.36 


$31.60 


$3,142.18 














Property Service 


2,501.60 




549.57 






1,654.65 


275.95 


21.43 


2,501.60 














Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 


1,701.32 

506.61 
293.67 




231.82 
317.75 






\ f 1,288.19 
\ g+e 81.68 

w 284.78 


87.09 

188.86 


12.54 
8.89 


1,701.32 

506.61 
293.67 
























640.58 


229.75 


147.25 








253.41 


10.17 


640.58 














Instructional Supervision: 


55.00 

61.17 
524.41 


55.00 

51.00 
123.75 


147.25 








253.41 


10.17 


55.00 

61.17 
524.41 














Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 









X 



SCHEDULE H-7— CAPITAL OUTLAY AND DEBT PAYMENT 

EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY PLANTS AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 





TOTAL 


EXPENDITURES AND 


OBLIGATIONS INCIDENT TO CURRENT YEAR 






OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 


ADMINISTRATION 

PLANT 

(General Offices. 

Barns and Storehouses) 


EMERSON SCHOOL 
PLANT 


FROEBEL SCHOOL 
PLANT 


JEFFERSON SCHOOL 
PLANT 


OTHER SCHOOL 
PLANTS 


TOTAL 


OF 
PREVIOUS YEARS 




$46,625.96 


$34.65 


$2,933.20 


$10,628.22 


$10,490.02 


$3,128.62 


$27,214.71 


$19,411.25 






Property Service: 


17,267.10 


34.65 


2,933.20 


10,628.22 


542.41 


3,128.62 


17,267.10 










8,092.96 

2,419.55 

1,281.25 

495.04 

276.77 

1,360.44 
354.97 
877.48 
311.48 

1,217.31 

569.62 

10.23 


24.42 
10.23 


335.45 

210.99 
406.86 
181.13 
120.25 

398.69 
2.00 
477.96 
50.97 
493.59 
255.31 


5,237.07 

1,892.28 

569.37 

313.91 

84.54 

940.70 
195.47 
353.93 
242.69 
630.34 
167.92 


390.20 

75.00 
1.19 

3.60 

17.25 
3.50 

46.05 
5.62 


2,130.24 

216.86 
303.83 

68.38 

21.05 
157.50 
28.34 
14.32 
47.33 
140.77 


8,092.96 

2,419.55 

1,281.25 

495.04 

276.77 

1,360.44 

354.97 
877.48 
311.48 
1,217.31 
569.62 
10.23 




Equipment: 




Janitorial (including care of grounds) 

Instructional: 


























$29,358.86 








$9,947.61 




$9,947.61 


$19,411.25 



